Who was the greatest fighter out of the fabulous 4?

The Simms loss, no, but Laing was close enough to his best weight and age to mean a bit imo. But, yes, those wins mean much more. And nothing else has been claimed.

 

I think the boxing lesson Benitez handed to Duran is actually quite damning. Hearns was a monstrous specimen that could punch like a Light Heavyweight, so that is what it is, but former 140lbs champion Benitez bettered Duran in virtually every conceivable department. He couldn't miss him with the lead right hand that night and Duran simply had no answers. The judges' scorecards were nothing short of incompetent.

 

Yeah, the Benitez loss was probably a bit worse. He was three years younger than against Hearns and didn't give up as much in reach and height.

He had slowed, though, and was operating three weight classes above his very best, so I don't think it's a big deal but probably don't strike it off altogether either.

 

Well, in varying degrees for different fighters, being properly trained is not an insignificant contribution to the sum perception of that fighters quality - a genuine attribute as much as anything else.

What could Buster Douglas have been if he came in as he did in Tokyo, every time out? Musing on that still leads one into a world of even greater assumptions - well beyond manifest performances and results in the ring - the hardest evidence.

Dedication and discipline (or lack thereof) perhaps can’t be so easily separated and isolated from the whole package - and trying to exactly quantify the degree of ill preparedness and its negative effects is no exact science.

Sheer talent rarely, if ever, wins fights on its own all the time. Some fighters have been talked up to have been so talented, they literally didn’t have to train - and didn’t train - or least not fully - Benitez I believe is one case in point.

At any rate, I don’t believe that Benitez shirked training as much as claimed. I don’t know if there is any back story to the Duran fight - but Wilfredo appeared very well prepared imo - and clearly came in with a point to prove.

The more elite fighters tend to get a greater ear for their alleged lack of preparedness - the same considerations aren’t afforded to the many lesser lights they’ve prevailed over.

Therefore, it can seem somewhat inequitable to only afford the marquee names such explanations/excuses as and when they fall below expectations.

Suffice to say, the lines are blurred between the appropriate treatment of explanations vs outright, false excuses.

There can be practical applications related to the belief that a fighter didn’t prepare properly.

For instance, say I believe fighter A only lost to fighter B due to ill preparedness but I know fighter A has trained the house down for the rematch with B.

No excuses involved or plied, but within my beliefs, that would cause me to bet on fighter A in the return match after applying a fair and reasonable analysis.

I don’t excuse Duran for his alleged lack of preparedness - but I do allow for his age, ever increasing distance from his best weight and accrued wear/tear. Imo, they’re simply reasonable facts lending to some fair/arguable explanations.

I certainly don’t think they compare to the air play afforded to the excuses offered on Mike Tyson’s behalf - particularly at just age 23 against a 42-1 underdog.

The negative contentions re Duran are primarily focused on the upper division version from near age 30 yo and onward, with already 70 + pro fights and counting behind him.

People might treat HWs differently, but there are a good number of people who feel that Ali should’ve retired at age 32 after Zaire, his legacy sealed.

Imo, by about the same age and after with all due context allowed for, Duran was extending himself into a highly extraordinary realm, still achieving some very notable successes.

Finally, I will say that I thought SRL was ill strategised in Montreal, trying to be macho, but he still ran Roberto close even though fighting Roberto’s fight.

Of course, that’s just a subjective interpretation and analysis on my part and again, being wise in strategy is a very real attribute, aka boxing IQ - however, my belief did lead me to believe SRL would do so much better in the rematch IF he fought his own fight.

Excuse the long post - much easier for me to clack this out fast than for anyone to read it.

 

Certainly, if we talk about greatness, as in this thread, lack of preparations can never be an excuse. Age, wear and tear and weight class can of course.

The emphasis for me is what a fighter did in his prime/prime age, but the years after aren't immaterial. Leonard greatly enhanced his legacy with the Hagler win, for example. Still, I think Duran's longer prime run with wins over Buchanan, DeJesus and Leonard might have swayed me in his favour if he went the distance in New Orleans and lost a points decision. As it is, it's Leonard with his almost perfect, albeit short, prime run and win over Hagler.

The placing after Leonard is really tricky. Maybe Duran, Hagler, Hearns.

 

True, prepared or not, it seemed Roberto made a clear election to bail at a point when it appeared that he still could’ve continued.

 

I didn't have the Benitez fight close but the judges did. If we are taking their word as for the Viruet fight, which wasn't close in the slightest (and took place in New York, Viruet's home).

 

7 out of 13 scorecards on Eye on the Ring had Duran-Viruet I either a draw or a 2 point fight.

https://www.eyeonthering.com/boxing/roberto-duran-vs-edwin-viruet-i

The closest anyone scored Duran-Benitez on Eye on the Ring was 145-140.

https://eyeonthering.com/boxing/new-beginning-wilfred-benitez-vs-roberto-duran

I regrettably have to say that this seems like yet another false equivalency from yourself, no_name.

 

I was just offering a perspective. Judges haven't always been the most consistent sources, let alone home judges. Eye on the ring is even less. Going through ESB's opinion on the Viruet fight, nobody thought it was close at all.

 

Just to point out alot of people say if "Buster Douglas had trained like he did vs Tyson". But what people overlook is that Douglas only lost 1 fight in 4 years leading up to the Tyson fight.

His form between 86 to 90 was very good with stand out wins over notable names like Page, Berbick, McCall. And his performance vs Williams where he knocked his opponent down 3 times with a jab, he arguably looked as good in this fight as he did vs Tyson.

People see Douglas's performance vs Tyson as a one off performance where all the stars aligned for Douglas, but in actual fact his form had been good for 4 years which is why he should've been seen as more of a threat.

 

You weren't just offering a perspective, you were implying that Duran-Viruet I was comparable to Duran-Benitez in terms of competitiveness. I'm sorry you don't recognise EOTR as being a credible source, but it's a site where fight fans gather to post their scorecards. Much like here.

Regardless of how one scores either fight, I have to agree with Bokaj in that there were enough troubles for Duran against Viruet to suggest that someone of Ray's calibre adopting similar tactics would be the Panamanians undoing. Duran had a few stinkers at 135lbs to be honest.

What are your thoughts on Duran quitting in New Orleans? Are you critical of him?

 

there are arguments for all guys in every position.

hearns.

 

No, I was saying that Bokaj's argument that the home judges had it close isn't exactly a strong argument against mine when judges also had Benitez-Duran close. The rest is just me putting more stock in ESB's opinion and mine two eyes.

I personally didn't see any particular trouble posed by either Viruet or Fernandez over the 3 fights. The most Viruet did was Clowning in the final round of the 1st fight by which time Duran was already ahead by quite a bit on my card. In any case, having had a boxing match just 18 days before and going straight into a fight with Viruet might leave a possibility of fatigue. Viruet was after all the 3rd ranked contender at Lightweight in 1975. The schedule that Duran was running at Lightweight was quite intense. He took 2 months off after the Viruet fight which was his longest break in 5 fights iirc.

Yes, moreso after reading the thread linked by Bokaj. But I wanted to evaluate the fighters at their best and I still maintain that the Duran whom Leonard beat that night was far from the best version of him. I believe that purely from eye test, without even getting into the whole fiasco outside the ring.

The last post in the thread had a very illuninating article by a former Ring magazine editor who became friends with both of them.

https://nyfights.com/new-york/no-mas-forty-years-later

 

Good points.

I don’t think the view that Buster might’ve done a lot better if properly trained all the time is mutually exclusive from the understanding that he was gifted fighter who did have some very good performances.

In a very important fight, Buster did appear to gas and drop tools vs Tucker - a fight he was doing well in until his tank began to dry. The interpretation was that he wasn’t ideally prepared and lacked 100% desire.

I guess also, though Tyson was obviously a great fighter, his perceived superiority over the rest of the field had reached mythical proportions, and the view on Douglas’ chances in Tokyo were a by product of same - more about Mike than Buster. 42-1 underdog in a two horse race? - insane.

Just prior to opening bell for the Tyson fight, announcer Bob Sheridan gave a terrific, balanced rundown on Douglas and his career.

Some might’ve thought The Col. was shilling for King, - talking up the heavy underdog’s chances - but in reality, Sheridan’s run down and analysis of Douglas was right on point.

Bob also notably mused “Which Buster Douglas will turn up tonight?” I personally view that as a famous and somewhat prophetic quote.

On the flip side, putting the contentions of Tokyo aside, until then, I think it would be generally agreed that Mike T always came to fight in tremendous shape - some of his opposition not being in equal shape.

As to ALL the identified “Woulda, shoulda, couldas IF only they trained properly” - it’s not an entirely fair extrapolation - the FACT is they didn’t always prepare properly. Period.

Conversely, those that did prepare properly for most if not all of the time (including Mikey T, and acutely so) should be highly credited for the effort and discipline that drove their commendable conditioning.

 

Yeah but it's hard to forget in the head to heads that he was the only one to be knocked out cold lying flat on his face an also the only one to quit during a fight cos he was been outclassed an couldn't handle it