Why do ppl always say Duran moved up 2 weightclasses to beat Leonard?

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0hthRxGaKg[/url]

If he wasn't the most skilled guy around he would have been KO'd.

 

amount of fights is not a good excuse considering Duran was very fresh and like Chavez fought many tuneup fights.

 

well Benitez had 3 titles and was youngest man to win them. He beat Cervantes and fought Leonard and Hearns and beat Duran when Duran won two titles at 154 and 160 later. I think it is clear Benitez was better just on those simple criteria.

 

I hear what you are saying, but we can say that with anyone. When Hearns came in shape and not overtrained for Ray or without weak legs against Hagler he won his superfights. And I always thought those were weak excuses for Hearns. The 145 was not an issue as much as Hearns did not know how to conserve energy and win a long fight where he was being hurt. He didn't conserve his energy well and ran out of energy and Ray knew when to pour it on in round 13 and 14.
As for Duran, yeah that has always been the story about him not being in shape but whether Duran was in shape or not should have never been an issue or a situation. He was paid good money to be in shape and he was fighting guys he knew were great and not just good and they had titles to win. He beats Benitez or Hearns he is back on top and talked about for years.. If he did not get in shape for certain great fighters (which I always thought was an excuse and still is) it means he knew beforehand he was going to lose and didn't train to have an excuse. He was a great fighter and knew how good these guys were. If he thought he could beat them he would train. The fact is he lost to all the elite fighters he ever fought. That is not some made up fact.

 

where did I say this?? I am not even rereading what I wrote since I would never insinuated something like this and nothing I wrote would be anything close to saying this.

 

the knockout over Duran was a great win for Hearns. Not too insulting on Duran since Hearns was known for knockouts and he was prime, but to say it was not great to knock out a guy who won a title at the weight and it was and should have been a unification fight had Duran not been stripped of his WBA title, that speaks for itself.

To eliminate a win by a great over another because of weight means Hagler should not get credit for beating Hearns or Duran. Tyson for Spinks. etc.

 

well this has happened often in the last 4 years.

 

This was the best post of the thread.

 

It wasn't JUST the weight Mag.. HE WASN'T PRIME.. Why do you continue to ignore this point? Duran WASN'T PRIME, and on the contrary, Hagler/SRL/ Hears WERE PRIME. You don't think that make a difference at all? I know you like building up hearns any chance you get, but if you're being honest, you know that makes a big difference. Was it a good win, no doubt, but it wasn't what you make it out to be. Duran wasn't prime.. nor at his prime weight.. So why would it be surprising he would lose to ATG who were IN their prime at their prime weight class. Those are huge factors that can't be overlooked.

 

Duran > SRL, Hagler, Hearns, Benitez, etc.

 

Well the fact is if you count only his "prime" as you guys say. He beat no elite greats then in his prime, which is significant. They should have tried to get a fight with Benitez at 140 regardless of people saying Benitez people turned it down, or against Arguello somehow-and I think Alexis would be much tougher than people think for Duran. Duran needed that elite fighter to fight at 135.
It is not about Hearns. But I think Hearns had greater wins than Duran over many weight classes, but he lost his two biggest fights. Cuevas,Benitez,Hill. 3 titles over HOF fighters. And according to your own estimation Hearns was not prime against Hagler because he was moving up in weight. And with the excuses Duran gets then I will excuse Hearns for Leonard because he was still relatively green in 1981. Any fighter can be given excuses for anything, but the end result is that Duran lost to all the elite guys he fought. My point is ok he has excuses for the elite guys he fought. But what makes him so great? His lightweight competition was not really top notch. So his high point is Leonard as most of his fans know. It all comes down to Sugar Ray Leonard who I think edges him. 2-1 in fights and he outclassed him and made him quit when Ray was coming on strong.

 

that could be but he lost to all of them, and relatively easily at weights at 154 he was at prior to all of them fighting there. I guess it is easy to say he is greater than those guys when he never came close to beating anyone of that level fighter in his career except Ray, who in my mind fought the wrong fight and totally redeemed himself in the rematch. It isn't like Ray said he fought the wrong fight and never fought Duran again. We have the rematch and he made Duran quit. I can say this the way Duran fought vs. the elite guys he fought regardless of the excuses, Whitaker or Mayweather with speed and style would have probably beaten him. Now people will say no way he would knock them out. Well when did he knock out an elite fighter? He never did.

 

Relatively green? The guy had 35 fights with wins over cuevas, espada, gray, bruce curry, eddie gazo, shields, primera, harold weston, bruce finch & mike colbert. So thomas hearns was relatively green in 1981, but finished after hagler, that gives him a prime of 3 years.

With duran we are saying his prime was 1972 until he quit against leoonard, a period of 8 years, he was well past it by the time he lost to benitez and especially hearns.

So your saying Ken Buchanon, Ernesto Marcel and Esteban De Jesus arent great fighters but wilfred benitez is? See now you realize why i say you overrate benitez. Those guys beat great fighters when they were young, but you want to give benitez all the credit in the world for beating an older duran and excuse the fact that beenitez was shot by the time he was 24. Ken Buchanon beat an older carlos ortiz, but he also beat laguna twice and has far better durability than benitez. Marcel beat arguello at featherweight right before arguello became champ and he has several other good win, de jesus beat the younger duran. But benitez is the elite fighter because he beat a much older duran, barely beat carlos palomino and got a gift against bruce curry, get real dude, everyone is calling you out on the bull**** u spew.

You sit here beleiving your BS but want to make excuses when Hearns was only 29 when he got sparked by barkley. Like seriously at least duran was 31 and 33 when he lost to hall of famers. Hearns was 29 when he got knocked the **** out by a clubfighter and he was given a gift againt james kincen, i noticed you forgot to mention that fight. In round 4 he held on to james like he was his girlfriend, even the announcers thought it was a christmas gift decision.

I can easily downplay hearns since you love to make excuses. Hearns lost the 2 legacy fights of his career, he was given the opportunity both times and choked on the biggest stage. He beat an old duran and benitez, big deal. He had a massive height and reach advantage against them. Like honestly just watch the fights and even try and come to the conclusion that those 2 were not smaller than him. Hearns decides to fight an old leonard in 1989, but avoids a fight with Mike Mccallum. Whats the problem? Hearns afraid he would get knocked out again if he actually fought mccallum in 1986 or 1987, yeah i think so. Hearns never beat great fighters that had his height and reach, he always wanted to fight names that he dwarfed in size.

 

Marcel, Buchanan and DeJesus were all elite fighters. What type of standard are you measuring them against? He also beat Palomino in far more one-sided fashion than Benitez did in PR when Palomino had been inactive for almost a year nursing a hand injury. He handed SRL - arguably the #2 Welterweight ever - his only prime loss. He beat a top rated JMW and MW (both #2 at the time) with the odds heavily stacked against him and well, well past his prime. If Duran at 154 is Benitez best win, then what the hell makes him Great if Duran had never beaten anyone elite? DeJesus beat a better Duran than Benitez.

 

Exactly he wants to dismiss Buchanon, De Jesus and Marcel but validate wilfred benitez as an all timer when benitez got his but whooped by hamsho, moore, arguably lost to harold weston and got a gift against bruce curry. Not to mention his win over palomino was arguably a draw and some have scored it for carlos!