Who is more skilled. Floyd Mayweather or Roberto Duran

[SplitSecond]

<-- riiight .. I was supposed to know when you're lost as opposed to when you're being sarcastic. Gotcha.

As much as you'd like to believe that you've offered clarification, you're still your own biggest fan because you write as if others understand that which only makes sense in YOUR head.

People shouldn't HAVE TO figure out or decipher what you're conveying.

And trying to put what you're typing about in any context is too much work to be worth it.

But I like what you have to say and found your post very interesting.

I can use sarcasm too.

ok lol.....

[WolfGirl]

What does versatility have to do with pure skill? From a technical standpoint it's obvious Mayweather was more skilled. OBVIOUS. That doesn't necessarily mean he was the better overall fighter however. As a very scant few along with myself have pointed out, it was Duran's brawling instinct and inside fighting sense that really set him apart, in combination with very good fundamental ability and natural physical gifts. He had extremely fast hands and great power at 135. Skill alone doesn't necessarily make for a great fighter, it's a combination of many factors, otherwise we'd see nothing but pure boxers.

Well, Floyd is better defensively. Great counter punching, sitting back, it is actually the foundation of Floyd's game set. Of course Floyd is much more than that, but the defense is what he uses to build up on.

That being said, Roberto Duran also had pretty good defensive abilities as well for someone of his offensive mindset. He's not as good as Floyd defensively, but he was actually pretty solid at slipping shots when he was attacking and he didn't nearly get hit as much during his peak as people want you to believe.



We talking about offense and Floyd of course have underrated offense just like Duran had underrated defense. Floyd had underrated power as well, but it's a no brainier Duran is the better offensively skilled fighter.
FLoyd just didn't have the variety and power/style application of Duran on offense.


Now, I personally believe Floyd's offense was closer to Duran's offense than Duran's defense was closer to Floyd's. But just barely.

The key point though is that Duran has displayed his skills for a longer period of time against much tougher opposition. That is the key to it all.

Can Floyd's defense still look like a perfect 10 against Ray Leonard? Or will Ray break him down? Can Floyd still attempt to attack a couple years from now when he's old and shot against a much bigger prime MiddleWeight like Duran did against Iran?

Even against Barkley you still see the flashes of skills which made Duran great. And in this regard of moving up to fight big MW'S it's not being unfair to Floyd. Hagler/Hearns/Leonard were the much bigger men, Duran not so much.

So if Duran can go up and KO Barkley, Floyd surely can do it against someone like a Chavez JR?

You can't just look at the very peak of every fighter when judging skills, you must also have a sample size of when they are past prime and have lost most of their physical attributes. For Floyd, that sample size have not come yet.

But it is hard to believe, Floyd can pull off a Iran Barkley regardless of how skilled he is.

[Pullcounter]

can't really compare roidweather to duran, especially since duran never used PEDs

[onetwopunch]

I voted PBF, but If they were to have fought Duran would win. PBF was born into boxing so he basically grew up and lived ate sleeped boxing, its like speaking a 2nd language, Duran grew up under different circumstances.

[WolfGirl]

I voted PBF, but If they were to have fought Duran would win. PBF was born into boxing so he basically grew up and lived ate sleeped boxing, its like speaking a 2nd language, Duran grew up under different circumstances.

Ya good point. Skills don't really mean 'better' or 'will beat x and x'.
Some people in this thread thinks that if someone says Mayweather shows more skills it means he will beat Duran. Not really.

[Fasttimes]

Duran did everything better besides Defense. Even then, his transition from Offense to Defense was much more sophisticated aka he was a better all around fighter.

Duran would beat him in a fight too.

[Japanese Boxing]

Floyd is more skilled boxer per-se but Duran was the better and more complete fighter. Floyd also doesn't have the toughness that Duran did.

[WolfGirl]

Watched some more of both fighters.
Roberto Duran's offense is pretty amazing to watch.
He was a lot more than your typical pressure fighter.
As good as the Rios-Alva fight was ,Rios looked like a joke in terms of pressure and applying it compared to Duran. Laughable.
Duran excelled with doing damage at various ranges and with a variety of combinations,upper body movement, jab,right hands,timing and angles.
He also seem to be able to mesh offense with defense really well(not as well as some of his fans like to claim though)



That being said Floyd also had some pretty underrated offensive power as well. His lead rights and the way he times it so that he won't be taking damage as he gets back on defense is pretty nice.

There is a misconception that Floyd is the better counter puncher though.
I think the reason people think Floyd is a better counter puncher is because Duran will slip/counter instead of doing the Floyd Mayweather slick pull counter. Floyd LOOKS more smooth with his counter punching because of that upper body lean/pose.

That doesn't make Floyd's counters more accurate or effective though. It just make his look slicker and give the perception of more skilled.




I wonder when did Duran and Floyd past their primes.
Is Duran past prime by 81? I will say so. I think 81 was the last year of his prime.(I'm not totally sure about this and will like a knowing poster to give a better estimate) I think Floyd was past prime against Cotto and Ortiz.

[WolfGirl]

Him beating better fighters doesn't mean he's got better boxing skill, he could beat Mayweather and still have less boxing skill. It's only one part of what makes a good fighter, mental and physical attributes are just as important.

This is very true and a good post, but I have to add that although beating better fighters don't mean you have better boxing skills, a part of how skilled Floyd has looked could be because he fought lesser fighters.

When Duran fought Sugar Ray that first time, he actually boxed really well via counter punching and avoiding Leonard's own offensive bursts. He had good feinting skills and used his footwork to quickly close any distance gaps.
He showed really good defense on par with Mayweather during spurts against Leonard.


Mayweather on the other hand also showed really great offense against Ndou and Corrales. In fact Mayweather's offensive bursts and performance against those fighters were probably on par with some of Duran's better offensive displays.

The issue is that Duran showed great defensive abilities against Sugar Ray Loenard (arguably the 2nd best WW of all times) Floyd showed great offensive abilities against Corrales and Ndou.

I'm not saying Floyd is incapable of showing great offensive abilities against someone of Leonard or Hearn's skill set, but he never had the chance, so we will never know. We actually DO know Duran was capable of elite defense against very elite opponents.

As for Hearns. I honestly think that Hearns was just the Foreman to Duran's Frazier in that styles make fights and Duran would never have beaten Tommy.
Tommy was a freak of nature. A 6'2 boxer/puncher fighting against 147-154 guys.

[B-Bomber]

Very interesting read.

I voted for Floyd, not because I think Floyd would beat Duran, on the contrary, I seriously doubt Floyd could have won.

But if we define skills as the whole boxing repertory, I would give Floyd a slight edge.

I wouldn't put it in terms of defense vs offense or effectiveness. I would rather judge skill on how many different techniques a fighter is capable of using, including angles, footwork, head and body movement.

It might sound weird, but one can have more abilities, yet be less effective than someone who has less.