Is Montreal's Duran The Best Fighter Ever

He's close the best fighter ever and that win is certainly in the top 4-5 of all time. SRL is universally regarded as the 2nd or 3rd best welterweight of all time and Duran beat him in his prime.

I wish the poll would have had a top 5 option cause it's really hard to say whether or not that is the best performance of any fighter who ever fought, that's a tough question.

I'm not even convinced that this was Duran's best performance as I was more impressed with his win over Barkley. Either way he was a hell of a fighter.

I voted yes, just to make a couple of Mayweather fan's think a bit, cause he's undoubtedly better than Floyd.

 

No great performance but not the best fighter ever.

 

Put that Montreal Duran in the ring with Hearns that night and he would still go to sleep.:deal

 

Hard to say, after all he was able to beat Barkley, the same Barkley who starched Hearns twice. But I think if Hearns and Duran fought 5 times Hearns would likely win 3 or 4 of those fights.

 

Not even close.

He fought a great fight and it was an amazing victory

But we saw what happened once Leonard fought his fight the 2nd time around.

Result: No mas.

 

It wasn't the "Montreal" Duran that fought Barkley though. Hearns was all wrong for Duran and I can't see Duran lasting with any version of Hearns.

 

You really have comprehension problems, because the question was "Is Montreal's Duran The Best Fighter Ever." nobody was asking about the second SRL fight, cause that was a different time, a different place and Duran wasn't the same fighter.

So why use one fight to discredit the result of a different fight?

That's like someone asking is the Lewis rematch against Rahman the best rematch ever and you saying no because he lost to Rahman the first time. That doesn't even make sense.

 

Hearns was a stylistic nightmare for Duran and would beat any version of him.:deal

 

MVC finds logic offensive

 

fair enough, but how was Hearns all wrong for Duran and Barkley not? Barkley was about the same height, same age, just as much power, and was good enough to beat Hearns not once, but twice and the fight was at middleweight and Duran lost to Hearns at JMW.

 

No, I read it correctly. You're just misunderstanding me.

If Leonard fought his fight the 1st time around, Leonard would have won. Easy as that.

He came out flat footed and fought flat footed unnecessary for the majority of the rounds.

Leonard fought the wrong fight, that's it. And it's giving people the illusion that Montreal Duran is some kind of unbeatable beast.

Don't be so naive, bro.

It's an amazing win, don't get me wrong. But to make a stupid claim like, "Montreal Duran, the best fighter ever"

Hell no. :thumbsup

 

Perfect answer if you don't have the ability to answer the question.

 

Did Barkley ever fight at 147? I don't think so and wouldn't give him much of a chance against Hearns at 147 or even 154. I can't draw an equivalence between Hearns and Barkley at 147 or 154. Hearns only lost to Leonard at 147 and was undefeated at 154 if I remember correctly. Hearns weighed in at 145 in a same day weigh-in and I submit he wasn't at his best in that fight but Leonard still beat the fighter that was in front of him. Duran would probably beat Hearns at lightweight, if Hearns could make the weight, but anything above that, I don't like his chances.

 

I have the ability to do it but don't feel the need to. If you can't see Hearns is a stylistic nightmare for Duran much like Pea Whitaker would be then I don't know what to tell you.

 

Funny even Leonard isn't saying that. He said they came into the fight thinking that this game plan would work. He then said 4 months later when he knew Duran had gained 30-40lbs he ordered a rematch because he knew Duran wouldn't be in the same shape he was when the fought the first time.

You really need to brush up on this cause this comes from SRL himself.

You might also want to know the score before Duran quit in the No Mas fight. SRL was up but about 1 or 2 rounds, so it was a pretty close fight up until then.