Duran is not a top ten ATG

[Brandish]

First off, why not? Second, is Willie Pep not a top 10 all time fighter?

I have never seen pep or studied his career, what did he accompish that was significant in his career. you might want to research these fighters careers before dropping their names

He dominated 1 weight class. Yet like Duran, most historians (people in the know) have him in the top 10. Are they all wrong, or are you right?

let's see duran was a dominant force at 135 at a championship level from 1972 (ken buchanan wba title) to 1980 when he defeated ray leonard. are you aware that duran never defended his unified 135 title. he beat dejesus and went directly to fighting bums at 147 I hardly call that dominanting. roy dominanted multiple weight classes for 15 years..floyd did it for 12.

they just didn't do their reseach and like you are biased towards their favorite fighters.

Hell, Sam Langford never won a title in any division. But after all these yearsm most still have him in the top 10 all time.

you keep talking about they, them most, what about you have you studied sam langford's career, if not why not. why parrot what somebody else has said and then try and pass that off as gospel truth.

How is it that you, a guy in the red, knows more about such fighters than people who have actually studied the careers of fighters rather than just go to boxrec

red, green it foesn't matter. what matters is that you can't refute what I am saying because the facts are there.

duran's period of domiance 1972-1980
Roy's period of dominance 1988-2004
Floyd's period of dominance 1996-2007

you do the math

[Brandish]

I am still amazed that none of you so called detractors of Duran or any other past great has answereed my question. What exactly makes you more informed about such fighters that we should disregard what most experts say? How is it you believe your arguments should be taken more seriously?

when you come back with some serious numbers on any fighter then we can have a discussion. this every expert crap is phony. go do your research on these fighters and let us know how great they are. how many championships, title defenses, and how many hofers they beat. when you can comebackl with info like that then join the club. otherwise sit on the sidelines and talk about red and green k

[wpink1]

Floyd 5'9", 72" reach, Duran 5'7", 66" reach. Not a huge amount in it, so a direct comparison is possible, although Floyd's the bigger man.

Now at age 29, Duran is 72-1, 13-0 in title fights, with two world titles, 12 defences.

Floyd at age 29 is 39-0, 18-0 in title fights with 5 non-unified WBC belts, 12 defences.

Difficult to use championship fights as a guage, given the proliferation of them in the alphabet era. These days Duran's non-title fights against DeJesus, the Viruets, Mamby, Villa would all have been with the title on the line, so he'd likely have surpassed Floyd's tally. But Floyd needs all the help he can get in this match up, so I'll let it pass.

Floyd has his best days at 130, Duran at 135. I actually liked Floyd at 130, he fought some good competition, and beat them well, but for one reason or another never managed to unify the division or fight any of the other titlists. From that point on, they diverge, as Duran moves up through the weights and continues to fight the best into his 30s and well above his peak weight, and ends up diluting his title record to 15-6, but still picks up two more titles at 154 and 160, both against bigger, younger prime opponents who were favoured to beat him.

Floyd on the other hand takes the path of least resistance, cherry picking the weakest titlists whilst ignoring bigger, more dangerous and more lucrative challenges. Turns down a shot at the undisputed Judah in favour of facing Gatti, years removed from his prime and his peak weight. Turns down two mega offers to face Margarito. Calls out Winky and then runs and hides and when Winky accepts the challenge. Adds up to about a dozen or so titlists in his own divisions that he's managed not to face.

It's hard to match opponents directly best vs best, since Duran made it all the way to 160 to take on a prime top 5 middleweight, whereas Floyd daren't even take on the top welters. I'll give it a shot nonetheless:

Duran never fought for any titles at 130, but I'm willing to match Marcel, a guy who has been dismissed as a "bum" by those whose sources go no further than Boxrec, against any of Floyd's best at this weight. Floyd certainly never beat anyone who beat a prime Arguello.

DeJesus vs Sosa...Puh-lease.

Buchanan vs Castillo...More competitive than many of the others, as Floyd was still taking on the best at this point. Buchanan is a HOFer and arguably a top twenty 135lber, Castillo isn't, and is just as tough as Castillo, but more skilled. I think he'd tie Castillo in knots.

Benitez vs Gatti... Poor old Gatti

Leonard vs Baldomir... All-time top ten welt vs the 43rd greatest Argentine welt. Hmmmmm, as Pink is wont to say.

Hearns vs Hatton...cruel, just cruel.

Hagler vs De La Hoya...see De La Hoya-Hopkins or De La Hoya-Pacquiao

Barkley vs De La Hoya...see above

You see Floyd's figures look better, but it's easy to look good when you're cherry picking titles, ignoring the other titlists and turning down career-high paydays to fight the best in your division. Duran fought the best throughout his career, even when past his prime and past his peak weight, whereas Floyd hasn't. That's why Duran's a legend among all who understand boxing, whereas Floyd is merely a legend at the WBC and among fanboys.

I think you know I have never said floyd is better pound per pound than Duran based on what he has accomplished, but he is close. I have said Floyd would destroy duran in a fighit at 135, and based on Duran only fighit against a fighter that used the same style Floyd would employ, we saw Duran quit, and SRL does not have the same defense as Floyd does, and floyd may not be the fighter at welter ray is, at lightweight he is very very close with better counter punching and defense. Ahhh and that is what beat duran, not leonards toughness, strength,,etc..

As for comparing head to head the fighters they faced..Good points. However you left out a major major point. those fighters you listed on Duran side as for who he faced...hmmm he lost almost all these fights..So are we giving duran greatness for losses....wow.

You say I slam me for no crediting fighters such as marcel and kyobashi for their greatness. Ok by using your resources and flawed logic..Since you point out duran as being an alltime top great because several sources say this, please go back to these sources and tell us where they rank Buchanon, Marcil, and Kyobashi in thier top 100? They dont rank them because they are not in anyone's top 100. So based on your own logic Duran quality of opposition is poor compared to a fighter like leoanrd who beat according to your own sources more top fighters and more highly ranked fighters in 40 fights than duran did in over 100.

Right?

Finally Jab....Have you ever seen Lanford and Greb and willie pep fight. Or just clips? So agian you are taking others peoples words for their greatness.
The same people that swore up and down that Liston would kill Ali, etc..

[Kid McCoy]

here we go with the excuses..did you realize duran had over 16 fighte at 160 and fought as high as 175 and he started at a weight class higher then floyds, how is floyd the bigger man.

Look at the stats, Floyd is taller and has a reach advantage, and they've fought across the same weight classes. Duran also started as a feather, same as Floyd. Ain't Duran's fault that Floyd hasn't the nerve to move to 160 or even take on the best at 147 the way he did.

wrong again, floyd has alwasy fought for the WBC title, duran fought for that same WBC title during his time. a championship fight can only be sanctioned by the WBC, WBA, and IBF. some recognize the wbo and IBO I don't give those org's much weight but I wouldn't argue the point.

Floyd has only ever fought for WBC belts. He's the company man and a probably personal friend of Sulaiman. But don't you find it strange that in this age of four belts per division he has never unified with any of the other champions?

duran's title defenses and championship fights were sanctioned the same as floyds. the only difference is that floyd started fighting champions in his second year as a pro(1996-1998) whereby it took duran 5 years to start fighting championship caliber opponents (1968-1972).

Duran began his career in a boxing backwater, facing tough pros as a scrawny teen in phone box rings from the outset. Floyd on the other hand was born into a boxing family and had a long amateur career, culminating in the Olympics, getting all the breaks Duran didn't start with. There's no comparison.

and another stat for you is that 46% (18/39)of floyd's fights were at the championship level compared to 18.5% (22/119) for duran

"Championship level" is a diluted term now due to the proliferation of titles and no direct comparison can be made.

so saying such and such should have been a title fight is irrelevant, don't try and smudge the boxing factswith your personal bias.

It's only irrelevant for someone who doesn't understand boxing. Non-title fights were common back then. Nowadays the networks always demand that some title be on the line, even if it's a paper one. Nowadays, Duran's fights against Villa, the Viruets, Mamby and co would have been for the title. Fact is this is an era of four major belts, which distorts factors such as "championship fights" and "title defences" because there are now so many more of them.

did you realize duran unified 135 agianst a fighter he had already fought in dejesus. floyd din't need the other titleists belts at 130 since he was recognized as the lineal rightful champ. unification is only necessary when you have more than one dominant champion in a weight class..like a leonard vs hearns.

Didn't need Freitas or Casamayor at 130? Who needs those guys when you can fight Justin Juuko. Which means Floyd has only held 25% of the belts available in any division.

and once again you want ot give duran credit for fighting the best but did he win against the best. you don't get credit for losing and you don't get ranked the 5th best fighter of all time if you can't dominat more than one division or beat the best in other divisons.

Nor do you get any credit for failing to meet the best full stop.

this all sounds like a good story, but you left out the fact that floyd defeated judah in his prime, gatti was necessary business, but I digress you have yet to present any facts as it relates to both fighters accomplishments.

Floyd only faced Judah after his blow out against Baldomir, having turned down Judah when he was undisputed. How was shot Gatti, who by coincidence was the weakest of the titlists at 140, "necessary business", other than a chance for Floyd to add another paper WBC strap to the collection?

all you've done so far is make your self look ****** by making up he said she said gossip about who suposedely ducked this fighter and that fighter. and it is laughable you bring up winky wright as a potential floyd opponent if you do that then you are leaving duran open to accusations of ducking nunn after he beat barkley.

Floyd called out Winky. That is a fact. Then he ran and hid when Winky accepted the challenge. That is also a fact. Floyd turned down two mega offers to face Margarito, a guy many of Floyd's fans think he would easily outbox, in favour of smaller offers against lesser fighters. Duran was 37 when he beat Barkley, long past any fighter's peak years. Floyd hasn't been meeting the best in his prime. It is ludicrous to compare Duran not facing Nunn to Floyd not facing his peers in his prime.

you could have started by analyzing level of comp defeated, not level of comp lost to since floyd has never lost duran would be in the hole already. but you don't seem interested in debating facts only innuendo and gossip.

you mean match duran's best victory at 154, and 160 compared to floyd's at 140, 147, and 154.. well why don't you do that.

I mean I would take gatti, baldomir and de la hoya as victories, over davey moore and iran barkley.

Floyd would never have taken on a Moore. He only fights guys he knows he can beat. Many forget that Moore was the 3-1 favourite for that fight. Moore was younger, bigger, stronger, more powerful, and had a long amateur career behind him. He also beat Benitez after facing Duran. One of the main talking points before the fight was "let's hope Moore doesn't beat the old guy too badly" and Duran put on a boxing clinic. No comparison to the stinkout split decision against the aging De La Hoya, who swept the early rounds and before gassing alarmingly down the final stretch.

It also demonstrates that throughout his career Duran has been facing the best and taking on the tough challenges. Floyd hasn't. As for Gatti and Baldomir over Barkley.

genaro hernandez was far superior to marcel and if you want to debate head to head accomplishments we can do that at anytime.

Oh really? Who did biscuit hands Hernandez beat to compare to a prime Arguello? Tell me anything you know about Marcel that isn't found on Boxrec.

once again I am not interested in your opinon only the facts..how many hofers did buchanan beat in his career, what about title defenses, championship fights. I am not interested in your opinion on fantaasy matchups

Buchanan won his title by beating the excellent Ismael Laguna, a HOFer, and in Puerto Rico to boot. How many Western-based fighters can say they've beaten a Latin American champion in Latin America? Buchanan was 43-1 when facing Duran, his only loss being a home town decision against Velasquez.

floyd beat gatti duran lost to benitez..next

Benitez far and away superior to Gatti.

eventhough floyd fought baldomir with one hand he did not quit unlike duran...floyd 1- vs baldomir duran 1-2 vs leonard

Leonard far and away superior to Baldomir.

duran got koed in 2 rounds vs hearns..floyd koed hatton in 10..next

Hearns far and away superior to Hatton.

floyd defeated oscar de la hoya in his first fight at 154, duran has never done this on any level. and duran lost to hagler by the way..next

Hagler far and away superior to Oscar, especially the shopworn 2007 decision version Floyd had to sc**** a split decision against.

floyd's figures look better because they are better. you see you fail in trying to get floyd to face duran's fighters. duran lost to the best of his era he was 1-5. that by iteslef does not warrant a top 10 atg ranking. duran had over 119 fights with only 18.5% being championship caliber. only 12 title defenses out of 119 fights hardly top ten atg ranking.

Floyd's figures look better because the alphabet era distorts championship stats and because he ain't been fighting the best since his 135 days. Even then he needed a gift decision against Castillo. Make Floyd have 80 fights at 135 and under before moving up to face Tszyu, Cotto, Margarito, Williams, Winky, Pavlik and Abraham and see if his stats are still so impressive. Duran was prepared to face the best throughout his career, even well beyond his best years and weight. Floyd wasn't. That's the bottom line, and that's why Duran is a genuine legend and a Floyd only a legend in his own mind.

[Ben_London.]

The threadstarter Brandish is both a ****** and a racist black supremacist.

His top 16 of all time were all black, and so did not include Duran, Willie Pep, and Harry Greb.

[The Noose]

Bob,,, If you want to see the power of Mayweater just look at his fight vs Corrales, and Gotti. Keep in mind Mayweather was a natural 130 pounder so his fight with Corrales was vs fighters at natural weights , but he moved up 10 pounds and put a brutal beating so severe on gotti that the man who is known for his toughness had to have the towel thrown in to save him....

I know Floyd can punch hard, but IMO its not on the same level as Leonard who was able to move up to SMW. Floyd KO'd Corrales and Gatti with some beautiful clean shots, but he had time and space to throw them. Gatti was a slow, sitting duck, and Corrales was getting hit in the center of the ring, not really when he moved in. He was much slower and a bigger target than Duran.

I think Floyds rematch with Castillo is a better comparison. Duran i believe could take a shot much better than either Corrales or Gatti. And his speed would give Floyd trouble.

U could compare Durans loss to Dejesus and say he gets his head boxed off by Floyd, or compare Floyds narrow wins against Castillo and say Duran mauls him. I think it comes down to opinion.

[Brandish]

Look at the stats, Floyd is taller and has a reach advantage, and they've fought across the same weight classes. Duran also started as a feather, same as Floyd. Ain't Duran's fault that Floyd hasn't the nerve to move to 160 or even take on the best at 147 the way he did.

duran has nevr competed seriosuly at 130 if he had he would have won the title at 130. what does floyd's reach have to do with duran going 1-5 agsainst his peers. are you making another excuse for duran

and duran fought at 175 do you think floyd has the build to fight at 175. nice try but your grasping for anything to hold on to your myths..even resorting to blatant lying.

Floyd has only ever fought for WBC belts. He's the company man and a probably personal friend of Sulaiman. But don't you find it strange that in this age of four belts per division he has never unified with any of the other champions?

floyd fought for the same WBC belt that duran fought for. floyd has never fought for a wbo or ibo title. and once again duran had one unification fight at 135 he did not defend his unified title and he had to face dejesus in that unification fight do to dejesus defeating him the first time.

floyd didn't need to unify any divison because every weight class he fought at he fought the top guy in each weight. did duran ever try to unify at 147, 154, or 160..I think not.

Duran began his career in a boxing backwater, facing tough pros as a scrawny teen in phone box rings from the outset. Floyd on the other hand was born into a boxing family and had a long amateur career, culminating in the Olympics, getting all the breaks Duran didn't start with. There's no comparison.

so now floyd had breaks that duran didn't, floyd had longer arms then duran, any other excuse you want to add this. I mean how can you say duran was top 5 atg when he is so deficient and never got a break. I didn't know boxing was about getting breaks.

"Championship level" is a diluted term now due to the proliferation of titles and no direct comparison can be made.

that would be true but floyd and duran fought for the same sanctioning body..the WBC

It's only irrelevant for someone who doesn't understand boxing. Non-title fights were common back then. Nowadays the networks always demand that some title be on the line, even if it's a paper one. Nowadays, Duran's fights against Villa, the Viruets, Mamby and co would have been for the title. Fact is this is an era of four major belts, which distorts factors such as "championship fights" and "title defences" because there are now so many more of them.

that would be true but floyd did not fight for the wbo or ibo once again we have sanctioned title fights for areason...stick to the facts.

[SickmyDuck]

Brandish, why do you hate white people?

[wpink1]

I know Floyd can punch hard, but IMO its not on the same level as Leonard who was able to move up to SMW. Floyd KO'd Corrales and Gatti with some beautiful clean shots, but he had time and space to throw them. Gatti was a slow, sitting duck, and Corrales was getting hit in the center of the ring, not really when he moved in. He was much slower and a bigger target than Duran.

I think Floyds rematch with Castillo is a better comparison. Duran i believe could take a shot much better than either Corrales or Gatti. And his speed would give Floyd trouble.

U could compare Durans loss to Dejesus and say he gets his head boxed off by Floyd, or compare Floyds narrow wins against Castillo and say Duran mauls him. I think it comes down to opinion.

Yes it is opinion. It all is opinion. Who ever knows. Forrest over Mosley, Douglas over tyson, etc. You never know until the fighters get in the ring.

However IMO based on what we have seen, Mayweather eats Duran's lunch at any weight. Duran had issues with Dejesus who is nowhere near a Mayweather. Duran simply could not compete with a SRL that boxed. He lost to Benetiz. So how can he be considered to beat a fighter that is better defensivly than Ray, Dejesus, or Benetiz, better counter puncher, just as fast, and his training is tougher than what 99.9% of fighter dream of. I really think Mayweather has been so good, that his mental and physical toughness simply has not been tested. Didn't we have the same questions about Leoanrd before the Duran fight. Only difference is Mayweather would not make the same mistake Leonard did. Also, Leonard size, power where not the factors that allowed him to beat Duran. He beat duran by using his boxing skills, movement, counter punching, angles, and turned the mental warfare back on duran. Mayweather would get way under Duran's skin.

Also, in the Castillo fight, wasn't Mayweather winning each round until his shoulder injury reemerged, and he didnt quit, he fought through it. It seems everyone forgets that point. In fact it seems people always forget a lot of points when it comes to their favority fighter. I really try to simply state facts, and be as objective as possible, with clearly having a bias at the same time. How is that possible, Easily. I think SRL is top 5 that I have seen. However, I say Duran pound per pound beats SRL in a toe to toe exchange even worse had it been at Lightweight. I say SRL loses to hearns at 154. I also point out SRL does not have enough defenses or wins, to make him a challenger to fighters like Robinson, Ali, Armstrong etc who have defenses and wins, but also THE QUALITY WIN(S) PLURAL vs some top greats. I agree that if Duran had top quality wins, and not all those ass whippings he took before age of 34, then he would be a top 5. However, he did have those ass whipings and no he was not physicallyy worn down, like say Morales, or Norris was. Duran may have not been as focused in certain fights, like vs Laing. However that is part of being a top 5 fighter, and a professional. Each time you step in the ring up until your clearly past your peak, and it is not "you anymore" but a shell of you in the ring, each performance especially vs the top tier fighters goes into the final evaluation of you. Durans ignore this repeatedly and only want to evaluate what they want, and leave out what they don't want.

That is called inconsistent measurements. How can anyone say that Duran acccomplished more through out his career than Roy Jones. Based on what? Cause when he was over 40 he beat camacho, cuevas, barkly, and Moore...Please. who beat more champions, didnt they have the same amount of titles, who had more defenses, who had more defenses at higher weight divisions, who beat more Very highly ranked fighters, who moved up 40 pounds and beat a fighter who outweighed him by 20-30 pounds still, who never lost legitimatlly until they were 35, and revenged that dq with a 1st round stoppage.

Historians mostly older love to rant and rave about older fighters, or fighters they grew up idolizing. Hell we all do it. I love Michael Jordan. You will never get me to admit Kobe is as good as he is. However, would Michael jordan be as dominant in todays game? I don't know, that is a good arguemet. However, one thing is for sure, it is because of Michael Jordan that you have better and more athletic players with more of a total package than you did say when Dr. j was playing. Sports evolves, and so far the fighters, players..etc are getting bigger, stronger faster, better training, etc. Yes you will havve some like Robinson that are way before his time, as you can see with his amazing record at one time during his career, or Jones who was so dominant that he could play ball the same day he boxed. He was soo good that many fighters that possibly could have become very good fighters, (Reggie Johnson for one) ended up never being seriously considered and his confidence taken when he stepped in the ring vs Jones.

Duran would not beat some of these slick boxers pound per pound that copied somewhat Ray Leonard's style. He would beat some, but the Jones, Mayweather,s Leonards, possibly sweat pea are not the straight ahead fighters that Duran beat up on. They are much better than the Moores, Barkly's, Marcel's, kyobashi's, dejesus's etc..that Duran faced. You can simpy see when Leonard fought a straight ahead toe to toe classic duran was a beast. His timing, his style, his tecnique for his entire career has been developed and cultivated vs stratight ahead boxers/sluggers etc. However, when Leonard showed him different angles, movment, you saw duran stilling charging in, but this time it made duran look like he was lunging. As you point out Analomy in the 2nd fight Leonard caught duran coming in because he pivot to angles and launched uppercuts and hooks that caught him coming in, vs the first time ray was right in front of him and through looping right hands.

Duran fans simply don't understand that. Just Like Leonard can outbox duran but he cant outbox hearns because of Hearns reach, height advantage and his great jab and super powerful right that follows. Leoanrd has to go to another style to beat Hearns. Well same for Duran he in order to beat leonard if leonard decides to box him has to go to another style, We have never seen duran able to do it. So IMO duran drops down in pound per pound ranking because of facts in the ring, his loses to the best, etc...

[wpink1]

You all brandish may be a bit harsh on duran, as Duran is a great fighter, and a top fighter all time. However, he is speaking factually. In reading his post he is literally destroying you all with facts. I dont agree with hm ranking mayweather ahead of Duran, because factually Mayweather has at 147 and 154 not fought the level of competion that IMO allows for us to justify elevating him to top 5 status. Mayweather would have to beat a Pac-man at 140 (pac man is a great fighter and 140 would be a reasonable weight for us to compare the two), then Margo at 147. This would answer the questions that Mayweather has to answer to me.

However, Brandish is spitting facts and objectively he is killing it. We only disagree with Mayweather and his ranking. That is fine, no two people think 100% alike.

I wonder why outside of Bob analomy, and the machine why most of you duran fans can not simply put down the biases for on quality debate, put down pound per pound rankings that historians that many of whicn have never even seen alot of the fighters in which they rank highly, and never rank the new fighters high....even though the fighters today are physically stronger, bigger pound per pound too. Put down the biases and for one thread simply debate merits on a fact based level. Debate fighters off of the following:

Your subjective views...
The quality of their best wins
Their career record before say 34-35
The best oppostion win or loss
Title defenses and record
How successful where they as they moved up, if they did
How many fighters did they beat that went on to become champions after they fought
Defensive ability
Ko ability
head to head if there is this data
how many titles
How far they moved up.

I think if you find a way to put a scorecard to this, it could help. Not answer completley but it will try to fighters on a even playing field. You apply certain points to each category and each category would be weighted based on the overall importance to the weight division they are in (like you cant measure a heavyweight the same way you do a welterweight, they simplly have no need to do many of the things that welters do), their era, and overall ranking of a fighter. I also included a subjective portion as you can not measure everything, and this part should probably be wieght abit more than anythig else, simpl because ranking people is subjective. Use combine all of these scores and you get a overll number that you can turn into a ranking.

It would be fun. That way you can compare Roy to duran, or ali to leoanrd...etc..