Wilfred Benitez (SRL fight) vs Duran (SRL Montreal fight)

So the oak loses easily to Benitez and Hearns beat him the same year. The oak loses easily to Ray in the rematch and rubbermatch and Hearns outboxes him in both fights. And Hearns destroys the oak. That is putting too much into it. Hagler knew he could beat Duran. He did not know he could beat Hearns. He knew he had to take punches in order to give them. This is about styles. This is more overrating Duran. You are talking about Duran now as this oak past 1980. So you are saying he should be held accountable as an "oak". Yet when he loses he has excuses. Do you see the illogic in this way of thinking. The excuses?

 

Be done with it. I guess it is ok to follow or go with the mob mentality and popularity. In high school people like popularity and root for the home team and the cheerleaders are great. It is nice and comfortable. I say what I feel on here and I don't care if you guys get upset about it because this is where we put the opinions. And I do understand hero worship and building people into a little more than they are. Duran was a frontrunner and he looked great winning. That is clear. This is not hatred, but what I don't like is unfairness.

 

Hearns was going tops in that fight. Hagler knew if he didn't knock out Hearns, Hearns would punch himself out in a fight like that. Had Duran gone tops like Hearns was going, I think Hagler would not have been weary of anything. Put that into context of the actual fight.

 

What the hell are you babbling on about?

Yeah, Duran was such a front runner against Hector Thompson, Ray Lampkin, Sugar Ray Leonard, Hagler, Iran Barkley (a large middleweight) among others. Those 103 wins came because Duran was a bully and a front runner. None of those 103 people, over 6 weights, could push him back or hinder him.

Duran was a natural lightweight.

Repeat

Duran was a natural lightweight.

You are seriously deluded.

 

repeat Hearns was a natural 147 or 154. he wont the light heavyweight title 2 times. Against Virgil Hill. 30 pounds above welt. And boxing him. You guys come up with the same stories over and over. Excuses. And still who did he beat which was elite? Leonard is the only great he beat. Real elite great, and then Ray made him quit. And won every round in 1989. Barkley? So what. His claim to fame is Hearns, but he lost to everyone else. He had a good style for Hearns. Who says Duran is not great, but he was a frontrunner. If the style was good he went with it and did well, then other times he was outclassed like with Benitez and not much is said.. Or Hearns. Nothing said.. Oh he was out of shape or unmotivated. Well then Mikey Garcia was not motivated... He would beat Spence if he were motivated.

 

In DURAN s 13th yr as a pro. 1 and 1/2 years after giving up the lightweight title Duran fought and beat Leonard in his 73rd fight. Pernelsweetpee knows nothing about Durans reign and opponents sohe dismisses them all the way thru to Leonard. Lets put Hearns and Ray under the same rules

13yrs after turning pro in 1990 we judge Leonard and Hearns from here on. Uh, oh. We be in trouble.

 

I confess I havent closely followed this (ongoing) debate but I feel like you're being overly criticized, for no real reason. I think a big reason for Duran's mysticism is that he's one of the last old-school greats who were still active enough to fight in the black and white era. In other words, he's a relic, a remnant of a bygone era and many posters here were just old enough to witness him firsthand. Therefore they want to preserve him and his legacy. You dont really seem like a Duran hater, and even if so, who cares? People should be able to like and dislike whatever they want

 

Hearns beat Virgil Hill who had 10 title defenses and was undefeated at light heavyweight. 14 years after he turned professional and 30 pounds above his starting title winning weight. 11 years after he won the welt title.. Duran's was 8 years after he won his when he beat Leonard. So what about your rules?

 

I agree. I grew up watching him also. He was great at lightweight, although my opinions are what they are. These guys have a mob mentally where if you don't agree with the masses we will all say the same thing and maybe he will go away. If the site doesn't want me here they can ban me. I can find another boxing message board.
Preserving his legacy is one thing. But I want it to be accurate and give the guys who beat him their credit. Guys like Benitez who was a heck of a fighter. Hearns and Leonard have gotten respect, but not someone like Benitez who beat Duran well. I would like to preserve Hearns and make him greater than he was, and he was great also but he made two stupid mistakes in his fights with Ray and Marvin. Both times he either had lapses in concentration or judgement. And that ranks a fighter lower. No excuses. The one thing I don't want to do is say Duran is the greatest ever when the fights he won did not warrant that, and if I say otherwise it goes against what I think. It is not the fights he lost as much as when he lost he made excuses and then he did not have another win over an elite. As though he reached a ceiling. A ceiling whose variable was Ray deciding to fight him. The losses don't matter much, but where are the wins over the elites.And my mind cannot accept what these guys say which is the Ray win puts him over the top. Well, if the win over Ray does that, then where do we rank Ray, who beat numerous elites and styles. But had a shorter career.

 

,
Show his record after that. We know Leos . He was 0 for 2 being KOd 1 time. Got his ass beat both times. Who else did Hearns beat after 14 yrs. How many title after 15 yrs? Duran beat ordinary Barkley who Kod 10 yr Hearns in three, 17 yrs after his first title and 22 yrs after pro. Barkley was an ordinary fighter who pd for pd does not beat Durans many lightweight foes. Yet he kod Heatns. Kinchen almost stopped Hearns. DeWitt had Hearns trouble. IN HEARNS PRIME!!!!!! There is no comparison between prime Duran and prime Hearns. Or prone HEARNS he was stopped s and wobbled so often. You are wrong man and I love that you keep defending yr already defeated position. Hope to argue this topic 29Xs more with you this yr Uncle Festus. You cwack me up.

 

And the mob mentality. Mob mentality or 1 dumbass who refuses to admit the truth? Guess mob mentality said Jordan was great. Guess mob mentality said Ruth was great. Just mob mentality that says the Patriots are great. No man. Just dumbasses refuse to admit the truth due to personal bias against the proven great. You have destroyed yr own credibility on any boxing topic w yr rabid hatred of Roberto Duran and his fans.

 

Defeated no. I welcome the chance to say this about Duran over and over since I know I am right. He is overrated and he made excuses when he lost fair and square and his record lacks elite wins. Not elite fights. Wins... That is significant. I will answer everytime here.

As for Hearns. Hearns fought much better guys in his prime than Duran did. I think you know this. I don't care about Barkley. The guy lost to Kalambay, Nunn, and Benn in one round.. Easily beaten by Toney. His claim to fame is Hearns. I knew Duran would beat Barkley. I have said this for years. He was given the chance to win a title when even Olajide that year would have easily outboxed Duran. Hearns destroyed Duran because he was prime and because he had fought so many top guys, Duran was not much a challenge. Duran can beat up Davey Moore, but Thomas Hearns was not Davey Moore.

I think Virgil Hill is better than anyone Duran beat 31 and up.. Undefeated guy with 10 title defenses at light heavyweight.
Hearns beat Cuevas for his first title.. 11 title defenses. Benitez- Hearns outboxed the boxer at 154, a guy Duran was outclassed by. Duran, Hearns knocked him out in 2 rounds. Virgil Hill.. 10 title defenses. Those are title fights. Both lost to Hagler, Hearns should have beaten Leonard in the rematch. Hearns beat Weston. Beat Shields. and I can go on and on. What does going through his resume prove. Kinchen almost stopped him but did not. I would think that were a positive that he hung in there. Duran would have wished to hang in there with Hearns, but there was no way he could.

Dewitt did not have Hearns in trouble. Watch the fight. Never. He hung in there and lost most of the rounds. Cut Hearns up over both eyes. Rough fight, but it was good for Hearns I thought. A good birthday win for Tommy. Hearns had better wins. He knocked out Hall of Fame fighters. You know the only Hall of Fame fighter Duran knocked out was a washed up Cuevas in 1983 at the Olympic Auditorium? Hearns was not wobbled much in his career up to the 11 year point. The Barkley fight started the wobbling for a few fights... Leonard, Hagler, Roldan, Barkley Kinchen.. The Leonard fight he was almost falling back in round 5 of the rematch. Where is the wobbling so much prior to Hagler? And look at the right Minchillo landed on Hearns in round one. Didn't hurt him.

Getting back to Duran, since this thread was about Duran. Duran beat Buchanan. Not close to Cuevas level in my mind. Moore? 11 fights. Barkley. Lost to everyone. Where is this great record, even though you want to talk about prime. And the question is you really think Duran warrants top 10 all time great? This is what I am talking about. And when he lost to the elites he fought he made excuses. He was a bit of a front runner. That must crack you up.

 

Mob mentality is being one of the guys. They sort of think alike talk alike drink alike etc. That sort of thing.. If the world says this is great they shake their heads and say yeah it is and high five each other. I don't do that. It is nice to have people back you up and it makes you guys feel right and that you won an argument on a message board against some dumbass then that is fine. I don't need that. I know what I saw. I know what I think.

I am not an expert on Jordan, so I wouldn't know.. Boxing is different. Different variables. Opponents are the variables and if one opponent is not as good, yet a guy can win a title he still has the same title than if he beat Hearns, in comparison to Moore.

Ok I am a dumbass for not believing what the mob does. Yet, I don't see how someone is a dumbass because they are passionate about what they believe-unless they don't have facts to back it up. I think I do. Rather simplistic and boring ones, but facts. I am repeating the same stuff over and over and you guys seem to respond to the same thing regardless of how many times I say it. I would think that is the definition of a dumbass. To use your word or insult, I think it is more dumbass to be indoctrinated to believe what everyone else does. Someone who has a mind of their own who is not influenced by popular opinion would not seem to be a negative thing. I guess you won that argument then.

You guys respond to my very simple comments over and over. Simple in that it is not complex. He didn't beat elite guys the way he should for a top 10 great. And this insecurity in you guys knowing what I am saying is true is probably the reason why you respond each time. That is what I think. You know it. It bothers you. If you didn't believe he was a bit overrated you would ignore me. This has nothing to do with me. Your responses speak volumes. If I were a person with a mob mentality I suppose that would crack me up, but I don't get feelings of superiority from this nor do I care. I just say what I feel and you guys respond.

Duran had charisma and he sure beat up Lampkin and that is great. He was a great fighter, but not top 10. I remember after Duran beat Barkley in 1989. Gil Clancy says this proves how great Duran is? Well then ok, then Hearns beat a great fighter 5 years before one division lower, which his fans say he was too high in weight to begin with. Then I say, well he fought at 154 before Leonard,Benitez and Hearns 3 guys who beat him rather easily. .You cannot have it both ways.

To be honest I don't care what people think about my credibility. I doesn't matter to me for people to like me or get pats on the back like those who all believe the same thing and need that sort of support. I say what I want and if you guys don't like it then fine. I will keep saying what I think on here. Until they ban me, Then I move onto another message board on the net and say the same thing if that is what I believe at that moment.

And I do like Duran's personality. He has the best personality of the fab 4. Ray is phony. Hearns is a quiet. Hagler is quiet. Duran is so personable. I can see why people like him, but that has nothing to do with how great he was as a boxer. As for Duran I cannot hate him, but the opinions of some on here saying Duran's record says he is top 10 great I cannot agree with.

 

Wow! You really are jealous of Roberto Duran. Like I said you never mention his craeer preLeonard because you dont know it. Ignorant of a 71-1 career and acting like they were all cab drivers. You just dont know his history do you? I see that now. IGNORANT. What you are. Your incapable of seeing.Btw Duran beat Minchillo easier than Hearns. You know nothing of Durans preLeo opponents do you? Phony. You have been outed creepy Festus. Just yr average Duran hater once more driven to extremes by yr uncontrollable jealousy and hatred of Duran.

 

Duran v Benitez in 1980 probably would be a close decision win for Duran.