Who's greater? Duran or Mayweather Jr?

That's not very realistic

 

Just reporting where the poll was at. It’s now 105 for Duran and 23 for Mayweather jr.

 

Like I said, people are idiots. Should we all watch Duran-Lawlor II?

 

You can't say it's been your stance from the beginning when you keep asking me to explain how being undefeated doesn't mean you are great. If you hadn't have asked me to explain that I wouldn't have needed to explain that.

So back to my original point, being undefeated means either you got the benefit in close fights or you didn't fight someone good enough to beat you.

I get why marketing a 0 looks pretty to casuals, but in reality it just means what I've said.

Plenty of observers have scored the first Castillo fight against Floyd. If you put 3 of those ringside that night and nothing else in his whole career changes, is he suddenly less greater? Not imo. Would Hopkins have been a greater fighter had he not fought Mitchell or Jones and retired at age 40?woukd Whitaker have been any greater had the judges seen what everyone else saw against Ramirez and Chavez?

I don't hold a 0 in as high esteem as you do when it comes to greatness.

If I look at some genuine ATG level fighters: Robinson, Greb, Langford, Armstrong, Charles. One thing they all have in common is they tasted defeat. In fact I think, and this is from the top of my head, the only man who could be considered a genuine ATG fighter who hasn't tasted defeat is Floyd and no one would consider him the greatest of all time.

So that's why I disagree, but to leave it in a nice concise reason for you, I think there are much stronger criteria for greatness than retiring undefeated.

 

I'd much rather watch his fights against De Jesus, Leonard, Hagler, Hearns, Moore and Barkley tbh.

 

Sorry, but you kind of want it both ways.

Are you saying Floyd Mayweather never beat anyone who was capable of beating him?

Because you also seem to be saying Jose Luis Castillo was good enough to beat Mayweather?

That's a little contradictory.

I seem to remember a lot of picking Mayweather to lose a lot of the fights Mayweather won because they thought his opponents were certainly capable of beating him... going back to the Diego Corrales fight.

And Mayweather also beat a helluva lot of guys who were better than Jose Luis Castillo and Diego Corrales.

Do you think no one Mayweather fought was good enough to beat him?

On the other hand, since we're comparing Mayweather and Duran, how many fighters did Duran actually lose to who nobody thought were as good as Duran? Isn't beating people you're supposed to beat a sign of greatness?

Mayweather beat far more Hall of Famers and future Hall of Famers than Duran, and some outstanding fighters who won't get to the Hall of Fame, as well. Duran lost to some pretty garbage fighters, on the other hand.

And we are comparing these two men, aren't we?

 

It was my stance from the beginning but you weren't listening. You just wanted to play political word games. You can go back to the original post, I never edited it.

Anyways.

1-If Floyd had lost the decision to Castillo it absolutely would make his record less great. A loss makes anyone's record worse. Again, not sure why you're arguing against common sense.

2-Whitaker vs Chavez is a bad example since Whitaker put on a clinic and blatantly got robbed. Mayweather vs Castillo was a very close competitive fight.

3-Ricardo Lopez and Rocky Marciano aren't all time greats...???

4-and this is part of why we've been having a communication issue. I never stated that being undefeated is the srrongest criteria. Even in the context of this conversation I never claimed Mayweather was better than Duran because he was undefeated or that it was the best criteria to judge them.

I just said if a fighter has consistently faced good competition and yet never lost, that is "a" sign of greatness but it certainly isn't the only one. If it's the word "great" you have such a big beef with then you can say that it shows a fighter is consistent. Mayweather is inarguably one of the most consistent boxers of all time. He was never, ever out of shape, never got lazy or sloppy, and always faced good to grrat fighters. You can't say that about A LOT of fighters who people claim have better records than him.

 

Oh I see your confusion. That's not what I said.

I said if you retire undefeated you either received the benefit in close fights or you didn't fight someone good enough to beat you.

But yes, I think Mayweather did fight someone good enough to beat him, Castillo.

Duran lost to many fighters he "shouldn't" have lost to.

Yes we are comparing the two men, the whole thread is literally dedicated to that comparison.

 

I wasn't being political, I was responding to what you said, when you said it.

So Floyd's greatness would change based solely on the viewpoint of having different judges? I don't buy it. Cos I mean everything in his career would still be exactly the same, the fight would still be exactly the same, it's just that the men at ringside were 3 people who felt Castillo won more rounds. I don't buy it.

I used that as an example to show a judges verdict doesn't always detract from a fighters greatness.

Marciano certainly, Lopez, not so sure about. But regardless I was on about the upper echelon of greats. Like top 50 ATG territory.

I don't have a beef with anything you've said, unless you was responding to something i haven't said.

Consistency is something I do value highly and that's something Mayweather was one of the best ever at, I agree with you there.

 

I would, too. But that's not the point.

I'd much rather watch that Zepeda fight the other night fight than watch Mayweather-Pacquiao or Duran-DeJesus fights again, but I'm not rating those two guys the other night higher than any of them.

 

Right. And Mayweather fought and beat a lot of fighters better than Castillo. Many of his opponents were certainly capable of beating him. But they didn't. He beat them.

And Duran lost to quite a few guys he had zero business losing to.

People nitpick Mayweather's record, down to a point on a scorecard here or there, and simply choose to ignore DECADES of Duran's career and 20 or 30 embarrassing performances in their entirety.

If we're comparing who is greater between the two, it isn't Duran. Trust your eyes.

 

If 3 judges saw him flat out losing that fight it makes his record worse. Had he battered Castillo from pillar to post and completely dominated him that would have been a different story.

When I say his record would be worse I don't mean by a huge amount. Maybe like the difference between getting a 100 on an exam vs a 96. Both are an A+.

But had the fight played exactly the same and he lost it would mean the judges didn't think he did quite enoigh to sway their opinions. If you're saying that doesn't matter then you're opening the flood gates to suggest judges only matter to a certain extent or that they don't matter.

As for Floyd being one of very few ATG's retiring undefeated, that just shows how special he was. I mean, do we really need to get into some of the less than glamorous losses to mediocre opponents of fighters like Chavez, Duran, or even Robinson? They have plenty of them too. You can mention their hectic schedule fighting several times a month and the fact there was only 1 belt with less weight classes but that doesn't change the fact some of them have losses to opponents who just plain weren't that good. This is where the consistency argument can creep in once again.

 

Again 82 % of boxing fans voted Mayweather a very distant second to Hands of Stone ROFLMAO!!!
Oh BTW Which retirement of Floyds did you mean?? He "retired " every time things got a little hot for him & he might have to fight a real contender for once

 

There where 4 great fighters of his era duran beat the best of them took one the distance and got kod by the other may has never beaten anyone of the caliber of srl

 

People nitpick the records of every fighter its one of the only things people do on these boards.

For every person saying Pacquiao was old and Canelo was green, there's someone else saying Leonard fought the wrong fight and De Jesus was never that good.

That's nothing new.

In terms of trusting my eyes, Mayweather has never looked as good against someone as good as Duran did in Montreal. Never.