Four Horseman Of 80's vs 90's/2000's

[BoxingGenius27]

All 4 of the 80's horesmen were brave enought to fight at 160.I'd have to take ot 1 of the other 1's that U have from the 90's & 2000's & replace that person with Tito,who was also brave enough to fight at 160.

Or U should keep it at welterweight & replace Hagler with Benitez or something.

I tried to set each group up with not only great fighters, but fighters that have all fought each other.... Out of both groups, the only ones that haven't fought each other are May & Pac....

Granite Tito and Chavez Sr very easily could've went in that group (90's/2000's), they never fought any of the other 3 members in the group....

[BennyST]

Ya but weren't they in the 70's lol?

Why you always hatin on my threads man

Everytime I look up you got somethin negative to say! hahaha. It's all good though...

Considering that Duran was his best in the 60's and 70's, and Hagler was his best during the 70's, they have more scope than the modern guys. As for who is better all around, I have to go without doubt for the 'Four Kings'.

Their competition was much, much, much tougher, they all fought each other, with all of them beating and losing fights.

Not only were they multiple division champs, but they were also Unified and Undisputed champs in various divisions. This in a time when to do so was very, very uncommon. Now, being a multiple division champs is completely normal and if you aren't one you suck basically. None however, have done the uncommon thing in boxing today and become an Undisputed champ.

Their divisional scope ranged from superbantamweight/118, where Duran started, to cruiserweight/200 where Hearns finished.

They are also, arguably, the best fighters in their respective best divisions in the history of boxing. Hagler at 160, Hearns at 154, Leonard at 147 (ok, well he doesn't make it past Robinson but who does) and Duran at 135. None of today's guys are the best in any division save Mayweather at 130 maybe.

They were just better fighters all around. Most importantly, they all proved it by fighting greater competition and the best competition over and over and over. Better as a group of four fighters and better individually too.

[BoxingGenius27]

Considering that Duran was his best in the 60's and 70's, and Hagler was his best during the 70's, they have more scope than the modern guys. As for who is better all around, I have to go without doubt for the 'Four Kings'.

Their competition was much, much, much tougher, they all fought each other, with all of them beating and losing fights.

Not only were they multiple division champs, but they were also Unified and Undisputed champs in various divisions. This in a time when to do so was very, very uncommon. Now, being a multiple division champs is completely normal and if you aren't one you suck basically. None however, have done the uncommon thing in boxing today and become an Undisputed champ.

Their divisional scope ranged from superbantamweight/118, where Duran started, to cruiserweight/200 where Hearns finished.

They are also, arguably, the best fighters in their respective best divisions in the history of boxing. Hagler at 160, Hearns at 154, Leonard at 147 (ok, well he doesn't make it past Robinson but who does) and Duran at 135. None of today's guys are the best in any division save Mayweather at 130 maybe.

They were just better fighters all around. Most importantly, they all proved it by fighting greater competition and the best competition over and over and over. Better as a group of four fighters and better individually too.

Good analysis....

[BennyST]

80s pretty easily. Both resumes and the way they fought eachother AND h2h I'd favor them in a tournament against the 90s/00s.

JCC could possibly be placed by either group.

Good point! I never thought about Chavez....

Chavez vs Duran would've been a war....

My money would've been on Chavez though...

Except the only guy Chavez fought on either list is Oscar and that was past his best.

As great as Chavez is, he can't beat Duran and their respective best. Everything they do and the way they fight, Duran just does a little better. Both were expert counter punchers but Duran just had more scope all around and could fight with greater speed, on the outside, inside, leading or countering....actually, Duran was more or less purely a counter puncher really which most don't realise because of his aggression. All his offense came from his great defensive skill and counter punching. Slip and counter.

[BoxingGenius27]

Except the only guy Chavez fought on either list is Oscar and that was past his best.

As great as Chavez is, he can't beat Duran and their respective best. Everything they do and the way they fight, Duran just does a little better. Both were expert counter punchers but Duran just had more scope all around and could fight with greater speed, on the outside, inside, leading or countering....actually, Duran was more or less purely a counter puncher really which most don't realise because of his aggression. All his offense came from his great defensive skill and counter punching. Slip and counter.

Ok so the Manny P of today vs Duran (143 catchweight lol), who takes it?

NOTE: It sounds like you give Duran a lot of credit. Granite, I'm only 28, Duran was before my time. Don't get me wrong, I've watched many fighters from 60's - present. But Duran was experiencing losing streaks by the time I started taking note of him...

Even though Duran lost to Leonard and Hearns, do you still think he's better?

[BoxingGenius27]

The 80s were much better. Not only did they all fight each other, but all of them were better than those guys. Hearns and Hagler are top 50 fighters, maybe top 35, Duran and SRL are top 10 or close to it. Oscar isn't a top 50 fighter and neither is Shane Mosley. Mayweather and Pac are probably in the top 35 or close to it, with room to improve but they haven't fought each other, it wouldn't be at their best weights, they wouldn't be in their primes and it would be just one fight. It isn't even comparable.

I think ODLH had the toughest schedule out of everyone with the exception of Duran....

ODLH fought - Trindad, Hopkins, Mosley, Mayweahter jr and his uncle, Pacquiao, Camacho, Chavez, Vargas, Quartey, Sturm, Whitaker, and many more.... I've counted about about 8 or 9 HOF'ers alone. That's not even counting fighters that were just really good.

When evaluating fighters, many people take the whole "what have you done for me lately" approach. They completely forget how DLH went out fought and beat the best, with the exceptioin of a few. Beating DLH was no easy feat, that's why I think a prime DLH could possibly beat a benitez or maybe even a Hearns....

[F l i c k e r]

Leonard
Mayweather
Hagler
Oscar/Hearns (tie)
Mosley
Pacquiao
Duran


In that order. If they were somehow melded together in the same era. That would be the outcome of that order.

Oscar and Hearns tie for the same spot. Why? Because they would beat most guys, Oscar would lose to Hagler in an insta-classic. Hearns and Oscar would have a huge rivalry, in a rubber match, I have no idea who would win.

Prime Mosley mops the floor with both pacquiao and duran.

Duran gets brutalized by Pacquiao. Everyone else prime, beats Pacquiao handily. Duran ends up on the bottom.

Leonard and Mayweather beat everyone on the list. Mayweather doesn't fight Hagler because Hagler is too high in weight. Hagler is 3 because he pretty much stayed at MW forever. So besides the people he did fight, his only other options is Oscar, which I think Hagler beats easily.

Leonard edges out Mayweather in the most technical boxing match ever seen. By split decision. Could possibly go a rematch. Probably won't as by the time they fight, they would be ready to retire.

Good stuff all round though.

[Barry Halls]

duran last? Wow interesting.

How do you see duran delahoya?

[BoxingGenius27]

duran last? Wow interesting.

How do you see duran delahoya?

It depends on the weight. But I got DLH from 135-147, respectively...

Many people don't give DLH the credit he deserves based on his recent performances. But fact is, DLH fought and beat everyone/anyone that he had access too... IMO, the only fighters DLH fought and didn't beat was B Hop, Pac, and May. Besides that, I thought DLH won the 2nd Mosley fight and against Tito....

DLH was one of the best to ever do it. People won't realize this until later on down the line....

[miron_lang]

The real horsemen were

Pacquiao, Morales, Barrera and Marquez




DonkeyMens

Delah Hoya, Mosley, ** Vargas, Mayorga, Forrest, Margarito, Cotto ))



--

Erik Morales vs JMM ( 2012 )!!