was Roberto Duran really that great?

[col Blake]

dito......

[BennyST]

One thing about Duran that is often over looked is his amazing heart and desire to win against all odds. Often a true champion is made by how he takes a defeat and then comes back. There is a great quote by Ali that someone has in their signature about coming back from losing and how it can give him something extra. Much like how Leonard gained so much from the drubbing he took from Duran.
A champ after their first loss can come back or it can kill him and he'll never be seen again (think Naseem Hamed) and this is what can differentiate a true ATG from a good fighter.
We all know of the huge defeat Duran had after Leonard 2. It wasn't just a defeat either, it was a humiliation, total and utter. How could a fierce, never give up fighter quit?! In a fight in which he was only just behind.
After the 'No Mas' fiasco everyone, including Duran himself and his countrymen, wrote himself off as done. An over the hill, shot fighter.
But this is what makes a great incredible fighter, he came back against all odds and won another title against younger, stronger, fitter and bigger opposition. Not only did he do this once, he did it a number of times after letting himself go and once again being written off as done.
Many people think Duran had no heart because he quit. I think he proved beyond a doubt that he had one of the biggest hearts ever seen in the ring. There are very very few who could come back from such mammoth mistakes and overcome all odds such as he did.

[col Blake]

One thing about Duran that is often over looked is his amazing heart and desire to win against all odds. Often a true champion is made by how he takes a defeat and then comes back. There is a great quote by Ali that someone has in their signature about coming back from losing and how it can give him something extra. Much like how Leonard gained so much from the drubbing he took from Duran.
A champ after their first loss can come back or it can kill him and he'll never be seen again (think Naseem Hamed) and this is what can differentiate a true ATG from a good fighter.
We all know of the huge defeat Duran had after Leonard 2. It wasn't just a defeat either, it was a humiliation, total and utter. How could a fierce, never give up fighter quit?! In a fight in which he was only just behind.
After the 'No Mas' fiasco everyone, including Duran himself and his countrymen, wrote himself off as done. An over the hill, shot fighter.
But this is what makes a great incredible fighter, he came back against all odds and won another title against younger, stronger, fitter and bigger opposition. Not only did he do this once, he did it a number of times after letting himself go and once again being written off as done.
Many people think Duran had no heart because he quit. I think he proved beyond a doubt that he had one of the biggest hearts ever seen in the ring. There are very very few who could come back from such mammoth mistakes and overcome all odds such as he did.

I think you find most of the people who diss Duran were to young to see him at his very best, the same used to happen to me and my grandfather, he though Joe Louis was the greatest where I stated Ali and Tyson.
There just a little ****** thats all, more to be More to Be Pitied Than Scorned

[wpink1]

Wpink, I don't want to bother with a large argument (you give great factual info) nor am I nuthugging Duran. But, I really do have to disagree with you stating that up to 34 years old Duran was in his prime. Boxers have different primes due to the way they live, how they treat their bodies, how they fight etc etc.

Mayweather (who I personally think is brilliant: what defense!) is in his prime at 30 in higher weights. He is very nearly as fast, sharp, and fit as he has always been. Leonard also had a great prime lasting well into his early thirties. Though he dropped off quite suddenly around his mid to late thirties when losing to Hearns, beating Duran, L Norris and KO to 'Macho' (though he was obviously much older by this stage).

Anyway, if you compare fights in different stages of fighters careers you can see if they have slipped much, gotten better, stayed the same. You state that Duran was in his prime until his mid thirties. Much of this argument seems to be based on various fighters primes' and comparable fights at different weights and how they did at those various stages. Can you see the difference in his fighting Hagler to his fighting De Jesus? Or his win against Moore to his win against Lampkin? What about when he chased the fleet footed boxer (22-0) Bizzaro around for fourteen rounds before finally catching him to get a KO against his awful performance with Benitez in which he was horribly gassed and tired well before even the 12th round?

What I want to know is can you see a difference when he last fought a very strong, hard fifteen rounds (1st Leonard) to just after when he was never able to do the same thing? That is what I would call 'out of prime'.

I'm not making excuses for his losses after thirty. I want to know why you think he was still in his prime after 29 years of age? Is it just because Mayweather is still in his prime at that age? Look at a Mayweather tape of now compared to three years ago. He is very much the same fighter. Look at a Duran tape of when he was early thirties then go back to 27/28/29 years old. He is so far removed from what he was I am just a bit confused as to how you say he is still in his prime. If you compare how far they dropped in skill, speed, stamina etc. then you could very well say that Leonard lost three times in his prime. Once to Duran, once to Hearns (well, you know what I mean about Hearns) and once to Norris. After all his skill, speed, stamina and fitness probably dropped less between 28 and 35 than did Durans between those ages.

Now this is a very subjective exercise. With everything else about Duran I very nearly agree with you and you bring up some good points. Yes, he fought some bums to keep busy and active and bring up some skills he needed. He also fought many more great fighters than you seem to think (The aforementioned Bizzarou, Hector Thompson: one of the best Aussie lightweight champs ever, very vicious, Viruet: who you never mention; great swift boxer. Duran beat him twice. He did the same thing Leonard did, made fun of Duran, taunted him, mocked him. Duran was very fast at LW though and was able to keep up and slip his jab to get on the inside and beat him in exchanges, nor did he get frustrated, Vilomar Fernandez: also a great fighter, Lampkin.). I'm getting off track here though. On this subject though I don't see how you can say what you do without it applying to everyone.

Sure, Duran lost to guys like Benitez, Hagler, Hearns (who was just too big: Duran was never going to beat him) and Leonard. I do believe though if Duran was in shape like he was in his twenties and able to go fifteen hard rounds in his thirties, much as Mayweather is able to do now, he would not have lost to many of the people he did lose to. I think he certainly would've beaten Benitez, maybe even Hagler... he just gassed out so much against them, but if he was quicker with more endurance... he was doing a great job countering Hagler. Close until the last five rounds.

In answer to the initial question: I think he can be over-rated but I also think he really was that great. As much for his true fire and passion and very human mistakes as for his accomplishments and incredible fighting skills.

Very good post, and your right everyone has different times when they reach their peak years. I do not think he was at his peak when he faced Hagler, but I also believe that he knew that going toe to toe with hagler would spell doom, so you did not see the same Duran in Montreal that you saw vs Hagler. Benitez was a baster boxer, counter puncher, very slick and unlike ray he would not be caught up in a a ll out brawl, and again this was at 154, another jump in wieght classes, and yes Duran was a bit older at the time, so I believe it was a combination of Durna slipping, increase in weight and Benitez style. Finally Hearns, I believes at 154 kills Duran anytime they meet at that weight. Simply he was on full display at 154, and it is hard pressed to find anyone that would beat him there. I believe 154 ws the perfect weight for him, to have his full strenght, speed etc.and not sacrifice his enormous punching power advangtage, as he does when he goes on up to 160 and higher.

Here is whats funny, you bring up good points well thought out and very intelligent. There are some who simply dont know what they hell they are talking about. such as Duran was in his prime vs Ray for fight one and not for Fight two. Or simply they say Duran was unbeateable at Lightweight, but Hmmm last I saw he had a loss to Dejesus...Or that it is assumed that anyone who thinks Duran could be beaten must be too young etc. Duran was beatable, he lost fight(s), as is everyone else. Styles mkes fights.

I throw in Mayweather simply to show how peoples likes and dislikes of a certain fighter shapes their perception and and how this clouds their vision. Mayweather is hated by most because if very ignorant attitude. I am actualy rooting for Hatton to beat him. However Mayweather has the perfect style to beat duran , based off of what we saw in Duran Leonard 1 and 2. Mayweather would not go toe to toe with Duran, and Mayweather as much as I love Leonard was just as smart as ray if not smarter. He has a better defense, almost as fast with hands and feet, and was a very offensively capable fighter at 130-35... Many people forget how good he was at that weight, but remember Duran. So I think based off of fact we have a very good fight, but based off subjective reaoning, I see Duran either destroying Maywether, or Mayweather humiliating Duran. I have never seen Mayweather dig deep, and that is why I say Duran could destroy Mayweather, but we saw how duran gets when he is frusterated vs a fighter like Ray, and believe me if he thinks Ray got in his head, Mayweathers taunting, bravado etc...and then when he gets in the ring is not going toe to toe,,will infuriate Duran...to possible quitting. Not again as I dont think durna would ever do that twice, but if it way mayweather that night in New Orleans ,,,hmmmmm.

Also...Why is it that no one brings up the horrible fightrs duran faced. I guarantee you that had leonard faced a bunch of these type of fighters that it would be the 1st thing out of everyone's mouth.

I see duran as being in his prime for the Leoanrd fights, not most effective weight class, but prime age. I dont see a diffeence in Duran having 70 fights and no amateur career and 40 of those fights were vs very low caliber fighters,,not wars...I see no difference in that and Ray having 150 amateur fights, and 35 professonal fights vs progressibly better and better fighters all the time... I do see that as duran got older and the weght class got heavier he was not the same, but is not this the same for every other fighter. Mayweather at 130 vs Correles was a beast, 6 times he dropped this undefeated machine, forced a greatly respected champ to throw in the towel at roughly his 20th pro fight, at 140 he destroyed Gotti in his own back yard,,,Hoever now as me moves up, and is fighting bigger fighters you dont see that offensive beast anymore, instead a more calculating fighter using his offensive defensive abilities to neutralize fighters. Then beat them. The combinations he throw vs Correles you dont see at 147,,,but you see more 1 shots and 1-2's... Mayweather has slowed down a tad bit too, and is not the same fighter as he has moved up... Same with Leonard,,,you didnt see the multiple punch effective flurries vs Kalule..It is also tougher with Ray because he retired and lost a lot of his skills, speed and stamina before he came back, and thus those effective flurries turned into patty punches vs hagler, and only opened up once Lalond was hurt. A young leonard finishes off Hrearns in the 2nd fight, but the bigger ray who threw single power shots, or slower combo's doesnt. Same with Roy...

So in summary you see the same slowing as you do with all fighter as you do with Duran. Duran had a more intense brawling style that allows for him to be more effective vs most fighters as he slows down because it is not based as much off of timing, speed, agility, it is based off of what is inside..and what was inside duran (except for when he quit) is the best I have ever seen, but that does not make him able to beat every fighter. Sytles makes fights, and Leonard when he used it had the perfect style to beat a duran who had to move up to 147 any day, ever. IMO

[The Noose]

IMO Duran, after lightweight had some of his most impressive displays. He adapted to bigger stronger fighters, and was much less wild as he was at lightweight. His wins against Palomino and Cuevas, and many times in the Barkley fight Duran showed how great he could fight.

He had changed as a fighter. His phenomenal speed and intense aggresion gave way to his wiley experienced finely tuned skills. Hagler couldnt break him down, eventhough Duran stood right in front of him. Barkley couldnt KO him, eventhough he hit him with his best power shots.

The one thing that seperates lightweight Duran from every other reincarnation was his burning desire to win. At lightweight against Buchanan he was on fire, as he was in his rematches with De Jesus, and many other tough fights at lightweight. After he moved up in weight we only see it in certain fights: Leonard 1, Cuevas, Moore, Palomino, Barkley, maybe Hagler. His desire to win enabled him to outfight them.
In a way i think some of his boxing skills did improve after lightweight, because he had to be more paitent, and time his shots a little better so as to make them count.

[wpink1]

Bobby Paz...i agree completely. My disagreement with others is they seem to want to only consider the wins.

[killer101]

These Post are very interesting. Duran is truly an all-time great. Any one that disagree's with that does not know boxing. I do not think that is what wpink is saying here. He has provided some good facts, and after reviewing them I agree with wpink as far as there are a lot things that in Duran's career that his followers chose to ignore, and only point out the positives.

It does not take away from Duran's over all greatness, but I never gave Duran a pass for quitting vs Leonard. I do think he showed how great he truly was by coming back after that, and winning additional titles. That we can not ignore. I did look at Box Rec also, and it is true that Duran did have a lot of fights once he was a champion that I beg to wonder why a champion would fight a fighter with records that Duran faced. That seems odd to me, and I never knew he did this, until this was pointed out on here.

[wpink1]

Killer, I am not saying Duran is not an all time great, I have said he is n my top 10. Just not making Duran out to be this God, and unbeatable force that some on here portray him to be.

At least you are man enough to go review the facts (his record). Duran fans treat looking at facts, like superman treat Kryptonite. They stay away from the whole truth, only countering with, facts I have agreed to and no one debates. I always say Ray Leonard is my favorite, but his short career keeps him from the top five. I say in his return fights, he was a shell of himself, and that any othe rmiddleweight champ, monzoon, Jones, McCllelan etc..would have beaten him that night he beat hagler. Leonard simply had the style to beat Hagler, IMO any day any time, any year. I think Duran had a style that suits longivity more than Ray, as Ray's is based off of speed, instinct, timing , balance etc.. I do agree that in modern times, training, diets, knowledge you see fighters emerge that are able to sustain their greatness longer than most of the past (except Robinson) examples Mosley, Jones, etc. who all foguth well into their late 30's and rely on the same attributes Ray Leonad did. However, a peak duran focused I think could have still been dominate around 140-147 well into the 80's. Mainly because the Benitez's, hearns, and Leonard had vacated, but also because Duran was that good.

Who can take away what we saw in Montreal, it was great great great stuff, and Duran came up from 135 and did this. But I tell the entire story, vs stop right there. The entire story is Duran did this, but Leonard chose not to box, which set the tone of the fight, and even so it was a decision that came down to 1 round voted differently and Leonard wins. Those are the facts, and duran fans always try to say Duran whipped Leonard etc...

I am definatley pro leonard, nothing wrong with that, I just wish Duran fans would be honest and tell the entire story, including duran fought a lot, an awful lot of bums even after he became champ which also should be figured into the equation if your basing his top ranking partiially on the fact of his great lightweight record, vs simpy his dominance of the lightweight division. I focus on his dominance, vs throwing up the 70-1 record as he had no amateur career and many of his fights equated to amateur figthts or sparring sessions that he recorded in his professional record.

[Panamaniac]

...I am not saying Duran is not an all time great, I have said he is n my top 10. Just not making Duran out to be this God, and unbeatable force that some on here portray him to be...

REALITY CHECK: You have posted more words on the subject of Roberto Duran, than anyone else has ever posted on any web forum about anything. For that, you deserve a place in the Guiness Book of World Records. Your anti-Duran obsession is mind-boggling. You need the help of a skilled professional.

That said, contrary to what you have repeated over 100 times (see text highlighted in red), no Duran "nuthugger" have ever proclaimed him to be the Almighty, those are your words. We do, however, enjoy extolling the virtues of his illustrious career; and while he's no deity, he is indeed a legend. We often celebrate the memory of his skills and contribution to sports in general, and to the sweet science in particular.

[SkillspayBills]

REALITY CHECK: You have posted more words on the subject of Roberto Duran, than anyone else has ever posted on any web forum about anything. For that, you deserve a place in the Guiness Book of World Records. Your anti-Duran obsession is mind-boggling. You need the help of a skilled professional.

That said, contrary to what you have repeated over 100 times (see text highlighted in red), no Duran "nuthugger" have ever proclaimed him to be the Almighty, those are your words. We do, however, enjoy extolling the virtues of his illustrious career; and while he's no deity, he is indeed a legend. We often celebrate the memory of his skills and contribution to sports in general, and to the sweet science in particular.

You have claimed that on many occassions saying things like "if he trained more he would be considered the best ever not SRR". Common man we all know Duran is one of the best EVER to lace up a pair of gloves but you have to weigh the pros AND the cons like we do to every great, Duran fans are quickly becoming some of the worst I can think of. He did so much good but don't you guys ever act like he was perfect and try to ignore his faults becase they ARE there just like they are for any fighter.