Who has the better legacy between Pacquiao and Duran?

[Dave Rado]

you sound like a moronic Klitschko fan, trying to argue with numbers.

That's what I was thinking! He and they both think boxing analysis is just a matter of statistics, and that you don't need to know anything about boxing in order to analyse boxing.

[jrosales13]

I guess it means nothing that Duran was most notably smaller against ALL the HOF fighters he lost against? and also was past prime? and even then was facing the best Middleweight of all time, along with a guy that won titles at LHW and even beat a former Cruiserweight champ way past his prime?
how about the fact that Duran was the first man to go the distance with the greatest middleweight of all time during his title reign?

you sound like a moronic Klitschko fan, trying to argue with numbers. Pacquiao's wins over DLH and Morales mean very little, seeing as they were both WAY past prime. I mean ****, Camacho beat Leonard and Duran...Camacho>them. pwnt!

I mentioned the HOF'ers Duran beat pages ago...And, these mofos' are just going around in circles...

[IronDanHamza]

I havn't read the thread. Seems Blackirish has already shut it down though.

But, It's Duran. Obviously, It's Duran.

[studentofthegam]

I guess it means nothing that Duran was most notably smaller against ALL the HOF fighters he lost against? and also was past prime? and even then was facing the best Middleweight of all time, along with a guy that won titles at LHW and even beat a former Cruiserweight champ way past his prime?
how about the fact that Duran was the first man to go the distance with the greatest middleweight of all time during his title reign?

you sound like a moronic Klitschko fan, trying to argue with numbers. Pacquiao's wins over DLH and Morales mean very little, seeing as they were both WAY past prime. I mean ****, Camacho beat Leonard and Duran...Camacho>them. pwnt!

Hey I made a true statement comparing two fighters. How do you go wrong there? And yes its worthless especially here to argue what prime is. For most its when their fav loses for the first time or loses to a fighter that they have sworn hatred for. Its good that he was competitive even past his prime. Hooray Roberto! It doesnt have a damn thing to do with Pac having a better record against the top tier comp. You like to jump in conversations and change the subject. Now your ass is in the same sinking ship. BS doesnt need the blind heroics bub.

[John Barron]

I mentioned the HOF'ers Duran beat pages ago...And, these mofos' are just going around in circles...

instinto ducked and vanished from the thread... figured that's what trolls would do anyway.

[KILLA RIGHT]

i mentioned the hof'ers duran beat pages ago...and, these mofos' are just going around in circles...

jro how old are u bro? If u dont mind me asking? You and silencers are the only 2 posters i really GET AMAZED WHEN IT COMES TO BOX LEDGE

[badass316]

I guess it means nothing that Duran was most notably smaller against ALL the HOF fighters he lost against? and also was past prime? and even then was facing the best Middleweight of all time, along with a guy that won titles at LHW and even beat a former Cruiserweight champ way past his prime?
how about the fact that Duran was the first man to go the distance with the greatest middleweight of all time during his title reign?

you sound like a moronic Klitschko fan, trying to argue with numbers. Pacquiao's wins over DLH and Morales mean very little, seeing as they were both WAY past prime. I mean ****, Camacho beat Leonard and Duran...Camacho>them. pwnt!

I don't think Morales was WAY past prime when he lost to Pacquiao. I don't even think he was past prime in the 2nd fight, and especially not the 1st fight. Comming into that 1st fight he lost a controversial split decision with MAB that many thought he won, including myself. Some people still considered him the best at 130 even when he lost that controversial decision. His match against Zahir Raheem was at 135 coupled with the fact that Raheem was just a terrible style match up for him. He isn't the first to fall victim to moving up a division and losing to someone whose a terrible style match up for you. Not everyone has the ability to move up into multiple weight divisions and have success.

Now I would agree that DLH was WAY past prime. But let's not forget he was actually FAVORED to win against Pacquiao. Hindsight is nice, but leading up that fight the consensus belief was that Pacquiao's head was going to roll once DLH lands his left hand. And looking back, there's no reason to think otherwise. Pacquiao was moving up two full weight classes (12 pounds total), and fighting a guy whose been fighting at 154 for more than 5 years. So to say the size disparity was huge is an understatement. To me the huge size difference, coupled with the way Pacquiao disposed of him more than makes up for DLH being past prime.

[jrosales13]

instinto ducked and vanished from the thread... figured that's what trolls would do anyway.

jro how old are u bro? If u dont mind me asking? You and silencers are the only 2 posters i really GET AMAZED WHEN IT COMES TO BOX LEDGE

I'm 26....Getting old.

[IronDanHamza]

Well do you have those numbers to school me because Im looking right now and the losses to HoFers is pretty evident.

2 to Leonard
2 to Pazienza2 to Camacho
1 each to Hagler and Hearns

Which 9 matches against Hall of Famers did he win?

Good Lord.

Why is it in all of these threads your talking utter ****?

Are you a troll? Or are you just plain uneducated?

[badass316]

I mentioned the HOF'ers Duran beat pages ago...And, these mofos' are just going around in circles...

You said that Duran had a winning record against the HOF opposition he faced, which isn't true.