How Do You Rank Duran/Hagler/Leonard/Hearns
Collapse
-
-
-
Anyone putting Duran last doesn't know boxing. Most knowledgeable boxing people have Duran first. Stop looking at head to head only and realise that Duran was by far the smallest of all of these guys and did a lot outside of fighting these guys.Comment
-
The fact all four have been put in each position shows an indication of their greatness...
I got, 1: Duran, 2: Leonard, 3: Hagler, 4: Hearns.
Can definitely see the arguments for changes though.Comment
-
Leonard beat all three
Duran lost to all three
Duran was the only one to beat Leonard, albeit but a point.
Duran then lost the rematch and rubber match convincingly vs Leonard.
These are all facts. I have no qualms you guys liking Duran better but he's in 4th here.Comment
-
True. They were all great. Someone like Duran today would NEVER be allowed anywhere near the likes of Hagler, Leonard or Hearns, not even the late 30 year old version of them, let alone going up in weight to do so. All great warriors.Comment
-
Duran was already past-prime when he beat Leonard. In fact, he was past-prime before he left lightweight. He moved up from lightweight and beat a top 3 welterweight (all-time).
That's the best victory any of them have.
I would say even before his victory over Ray Leonard, he had a better resume than Hagler or Hearns. Look at his lightweight resume, not only is it stacked, he fought 6 more times than Hagler or Hearns would ever fight (twice as many as Leonard), before he moved up to fight Leonard.
You should learn more about Duran before you try to rank him.Comment
Comment