Is it Possible we Overrate Duran?

OK. Give me your top 25 if you have the time.

I responded to this already. And Dempsey got into a title shot with a much more blatant low blow for which I rarely if ever give him grief.

 

I'm no Duran fan and is a bit annoyed by the ****sucking adulation and excuses he often gets, but eying through some posts here he seems underrated if anything. Top 10 p4p seems quite arguable for him imo - allowing for how extremely difficult such lists are. Did someone have him below effing Trinidad? Now that's just mental, in that case.

He definitely was a tremendous LW and had some fantastic performances above that weight (most notably against SRL and Barkley).

 

I rank Duran a 6 to 15 ATG anybody who has him outside 15 is just a hater.
He had the lot. The ridiculous longevity. The lightweight dominance that has him placed top 3 all time in the most stacked division of greats ever. He's the best fighter of the 70's with Ali and has one of/if not the greatest win ever in boxing history. He also had the respectable losses vs great prime fighters when he was past his prime and often a bloated state. I don't think he could ever beat the version of Hearns that destroyed him. He said Hearns was too long, fast and he just couldn't get under those long arms to counter him. Duran would always toil to hurt never mind beat Hagler. He almost outsmarted Hagler until Hagler gritted out the last 3 rounds showing some superb skills in doing so. Haglers face was a mess Duran hardly had a mark. I think Duran could beat Benitez if they fought again and he was totally up for it.

Duran has one of the slickest all round skill set you'll ever see on film and had the strength and chin to fight as a skinny kid at bantam all the way to super middle as an old man while still fighting excellent guy's most the way while being way past his best. What a ****ing legend

As for Dempsey I think he's one of those guy's who are both underrated and overrated. I need to look more into his record.

 

The thought is rather ludicrous. About the only possible argument I can see is rating Tito higher at "welterweight" only due to his long title reign, but even that's highly in question. As for p4p, its not even close.

 

I think about 8 is fair as an ATG and a top 3 lightweight is not up for much debate although there has been lightweights with greater wins but just didn't have the longevity. I think Carlos Ortiz's rank should be better than it is (right now its usually just in the top 10 I think). Carlos is absolutely brilliant to watch and has some big wins. He would beat the version of Duran that lost to Dejesus the first time. Carlos was very accurate and had great punch variety. Gans and Leonard look very special from what we have of them on film and their reputations from fellow pro's and trainers are off the scale. Garfield would rave about Benny Leonard all the time. He seen them all that man. R.I.P.
Duran is defo no stick on n1 lightweight like I used to think he was. The Dejesus wins were brilliant but his best win at lightweight was when he dethroned/beat the **** out of the brilliant Scot Ken Buchanan handily in a competitive fight. Buchanan was an outstanding boxer/mover and a teak tough warrior. That win is totally underrated. Nowaday's he would've probably been DQ'd after the first few rounds. What a dirty sod he was to my hero
If Ken was around in a future era I have no doubts he would have beat Oscar, Shane, Marquez, Pac and would take Floyd all the way in a chess match. I think his flaw was to try to war too much when he was tagged or frustrated. Floyd would counter Kens attacks. Ken left that Iron beard out too much when he was throwing leather, especially to the body.

 

Joppy, Vargas and Mayorga vs Moore and Barkley :think

 

Valid points plus the huge middle weight beast Barkley had just beat future ATG monster puncher Tommy Hearns :good Duran took all Barkley had started to outsmart him on the inside and then put him on his **** with one of the meanest, awesome looking combination punches I've ever seen.
We wont get into Moore that was truly devastating from the massive underdog. People don't realise Moore was banging out nearly everybody and tko'd the outstanding Ayub Kalule in a great fight before he walked in the ring over confident against little fat snarling 'Manos de Piedra'. I think Duran ended the talented Moore even though Moore was still good enough to KO early a slightly past it Benitez a few fights later.

 

I think the bigger point is that Trinidad was much closer to being a natural (jr) middle then Duran was by a country mile.

 

I don't have a top 25, but someone could argue a case for any of these ...

Sugar Ray Robinson, Sam Langford, Harry Greb, Henry Armstrong
Joe Gans, Benny Leonard, Bob Fitzsimmons, Ezzard Charles, Willie Pep, Mickey Walker, Pernell Whitaker, Barney Ross, Archie Moore
, Joe Louis, Charley Burley, Tony Canzoneri, Jimmy Wilde, Carlos Monzon, Muhammad Ali, Jimmy Bivins, Panama Al Brown, Marvin Hagler, Sandy Saddler, Julio Cesar Chavez, Kid Chocolate
... among others.

There's no doubt that Duran belongs with them. :good

Not true.
Duran's was more blatant, late and appeared more shocking (Sharkey actually turned to the referee to explain that he'd been hit low.)

 

Duran's run as a lightweight often gets overstated. Beyond the quality wins over De Jesus and Buchanan, he didn't actually fight that many ranked contenders at the weight and outright ducked Rodolfo Gonzalez and waited years before properly unifying the division.

Weird how people act like he's clearly the greatest fighter ever in arguably the most historically deep division in history, despite several fighters having a better resume at the weight.

 

No it wasn't. I watched it recently and neither fighter heard the bell and so the ref grabbed Duran while he was in the middle of a punch and that's why it landed low. It certainly wasn't intentional. It's on youtube, watch it for yourself.

 

The flip side of this is he really gets no credit at all for all the non title wins he racked up at lw. When he won the title he was 29-0 and when he left the division he was 64-1. That's 36 fights which is a hell of a lot of fights, no matter how you look at it. Hell it represents about 3/4 of the entire number of fights Mayweather fought in his entire careers so far.

 

Plus a lot of those so called nobody's Duran beat at lightweight would probably hold titles in later era's never mind Ken and DeJesus. I honestly think Buchanan would school nearly every lightweight I grew up watching. Even Pac. Buchanan didn't have elite power but he was super clever, a highly skilled counter puncher and had great technique and movement. On top of that you have his iron beard, fighting spirit and ability to get the better of exchanges as he did beautifuly vs Duran at times when Duran got crude. Pac fights in straight lines mostly. Jumping in and out. Ken moves anyway he choses because his feet were so nimble and balanced. Pac would be eating jabs all night while Ken moved around him hitting him at will. Ken would evade most of pacs attacks but Pac has speed so he would have to engage at times. That would not faze the teak tough fighting Scot with amazing stamina though. H2H only a handful of lightweights better Ken. Probably Floyd and Pea for a start. They're just to hard to hit and rarely make mistakes. JCC would just be too much for Ken to deal with.
If DeJesus was around in my era growing up he would also give them all hell. Floyd would be ****ting it to fight him. Very tough dude with great hands. Carlos Ortiz was the **** in his prime he would kill all the HOF lights of future era's even Floyd. Laguna could quite easily jab them all pizza faces with those long clever arms, and he was hard as nails himself. No division has produced better/tougher fighters imo and I include Shane, Oscar, Floyd and Pac. Maybe middle if theres any with guys like Hagler, Monzon, Steel, Ketchel etc, etc.

Sorry for the huge off topic post. I'm bad for that at times lol.

 

Both Duran and Hagler were surprised by the non-aggression exhibited by the other. In effect, they both had the same idea going in. So it ended being a chess match -Duran didn't want to get too physical with a much-stronger man and Hagler didn't want to risk a cut or a thumb to the eye.

After 12, he was close to winning and would've earned a draw. That would have been remembered as controversial, sure, but Leonard is remembered by beating Hagler like he did Duran and Hearns and Duran might have as well had there been a twist of fate or two.

So, my point is that Duran fought more than just a smart fight. And my question is intended to demonstrate it -I encourage you to give a shot at an answer.

I don't feel it is relevant to his lightweight legacy either, which is one reason why I think B. Leonard must be considered the greater lightweight even though I am one who holds that Duran is the greater fighter.

I'm with you there!

 

Duran`s reign was never interrupted. 12 successful Title Defense over 6 years at Lightweight similar to what Hagler did.