1978 Roberto Duran vs 2003 Floyd Mayweather jr. 15 rds @ 135

Okay, then. You can pick either way on floyd vs Duran. You can pick either way on Corrales vs DeJesus. But to claim Lampkin, who has no resume beyond losing to a few good fighters, was better than Corrales based on an "eye test" without a common opponent is absurd.

 

It's in the book Hands Of Stone that Durans team didn't want to fight Buchanan again. Buchanans team were calling for it to be made in Scotland I think :think It was a hard fight for Duran if not losable at all unless Duran didn't train properly. Team Duran had other fish to fry, more money to make. Buchanan was not a popular fighter outside America, he had a good fan base in new york and his style was loved by the fight fans but that's about it. There's much, much more Latin fight fans in America than Scots fight fans so the likes of the De Jesus fights were much bigger. The second fight was huge in Panama. Not beating Buchanan again was worth it. The UK and even Scotland never got behind Buchanan and he's still not famous over here now (which angered Mike Tyson when he found out after visiting Scotland in the 90's) Ken was a travelling fighter from Edinburgh which is not a huge boxing loving City, even though they have two ancient boxing clubs that have produced talent. Ken based himself in Wales for the better sparring. Scotland is not a huge boxing nation, well, not since the days of Benny Lynch when hundreds of thousand of east Glaswegians lined the streets to greet their hero coming back from victory. Duran would fight anybody but even he was lured by money as well, even if he knew Ken deserved the rematch he wasn't doing it for less than he could get else where and he was never fighting the crafty tough Scot in the UK where no one had even heard much of Ken Buchanan. Would you?

 

^good post

 

Stop putting words in my mouth. I never claimed Lampkin was better than Corrales. I mocked Lampkins poor resume and claimed he was decent looking which he is at times. Coralles is better than decent but he is not that great of a fighter if great at all.

 

I didn't put words in your mouth. I was talking about what Mongoose said.

Edit: my phone is signed in under a N_N___

 

Get that cheating son of a ***** Pryor of any list

Unless you are going to include a special shake bottle in his match up fights

And whilst were at it
Get that bum Shane mosely off any list aswell

Mayweather should be bumped up

 

This is just bitter Duran hate.

This thread is a fantasy fight, not a criticism of Duran's title reign and rematch choices.

The point is Duran beat Buchanan convincingly in their first fight and that its a fair example of Duran beating an excellent boxer/mover. You didn't even think Bucnahan was good in your initial posts, now you rae championing his cause. :nut

 

So team Duran prevented the rematch of his best opponent at lightweight that I noted earned his best name wins over fighters making their final ring appearance. Thanks.

Bottom line. Kenny deserved a re-match. Duran never gave it to him.

Bottom line. Buchannan best names wins were vs shot fighters in their last ring appearance.

This is not hate, its fact. As for Duran having issues with speedy boxers as Mayweather is, its part of the process in terms of picking who you think would win.

 

It's not absurd. Fans quite regularly find fighters to be superior on film to other fighters, regardless of resume. You can either argue my observations or continue to complain about me using them.

Lampkin at his best, struck out in three attempts against an all time great and a top tier near great fighter. But was very impressive in each outing and recieved high praise for his performances.

He didn't get to fight for alphabet titles or prove himself against second tier decent names. I believe he is something like 4-1 against other Ring Rated contenders.

Corrales had more opportunities at decent second tier names for alphabet titles. His resume on paper is better, but I don't believe him to be the better fighter in the ring.

 

-And this tells us what about a Mayweather/Duran match up?

-I would disagree. I find that to be a gross misuse of the term "shot."

Ruben Navaro was 25 years old and would fight 14 more times.

Laguna was a 27 year old reigning Champion, favored 5-2 to win. Laguna decided to retire after failing to avenge the Buchanan defeat and regain his title.

Ortiz was past his best at 36 but hardly shot. He was on a 10 fight winning streak since losing his title via split decision. Buchanan beating him up like nobody had before and forcing his only TKO loss is a good achievement.

-You haven't presented any facts. Some opinions, just some more valid than others.

I'm waiting to hear how the Duran/Buchanan rematch that never was is factoring into this fantasy fight. How about the fight that actually happened?

 

I was giving him the benefit of the doubt but now as you say, this is just showing hate for the guy.

Personally I have a hard time even reconciling how a true boxing fan could hate Duran, he had every quality a boxing fan would want to see in a fighter.

In the 2nd Dejesus fight Pacheco said that Duran told him that when you step in the ring with him, you're trying to take his house, his wife, and his money and when he was at 135 he fought liked he meant it.

 

The only fact that really matters is when Duran actually fought Buchannan it wasn't an overly competitive fight. Had Buchannan been winning the fight up until the stoppage you would have a valid point, but as things stand you really don't. Even when Lewis beat Vitali, he never owed him anything, because this isn't horseshoes, coming close to winning only means the fans got their monies worth, moral victories don't really count in this game.