Myth: Roberto Duran has a better resume than Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao.

Lol.

 

Yes, Mayweather would exceed that and go 0-4.

 

Not inbetween being unranked in April 07 and fighting Mayweather he didn't.

He wasn't ranked at WW by the Ring when he fought Mayweather.

I haven't read your OP, but if you've listed Hatton as a top 5 contender win for Mayweather when he wasn't ranked in that division then, frankly, it casts a doubt over other stats you claim, as you clearly don't mind passing off something erroneous as fact.

 

I only care that this particular "stat" was being claimed as a fact erroneously. I agree with your final sentence, e.g. the stats in the OP are largely meaningless without proper context.

 

@NoNeck
Thanks for the answers.
* Looks like You're right regarding Cotto and He was indeed ranked number 1 by the ring at Super Welterweight when Floyd fought him. I never thought He was "the guy", but You could probably make argument for that at the time, due to some circumstances (Carlos Molina and Lara being recently "jobbed". Canelo, Trout and Vanes not yet fighting anyone etc.).

* As for Sharmba, He was ranked year earlier and at lower weight (140). Floyd fought him at Welterweight when He wasn't ranked.

* Ricky Hatton, like @Greg Price99 explained, wasn't ranked at welterweight, but at weight below. You even have a category for that "Top 5 guys moving up or down in weight immediately before fight:" so that's where Ricky should fit, for Floyd, by your criteria - just like You put Hiroshi Kobayashi there for Duran.

As for the rest, I'm not going to argue. It's entirely possible that Floyd and Manny beat more guys who were ranked number 1, 2-5 or in top 10 by The Ring than Roberto Duran did.
Yet, proving that is not the same thing as proving that They have superior resume. Everyone who follows boxing for some times realises that weight-classes aren't always equally strong, there are big differences in abilities between one beltholder and another, or even one champion to another.
Putting it down to those kind of simplistic categories is interesting excercise, but not a good way of judging resumes.
Just my 2 cents, thanks again.

 

Excellent post

 

And Ken Buchanan nobody has mentioned?
Think that was an impressive win.

 

Thanks @Greg Price99 . Did my best, althought 70s and 80s is not my "field of expertise" let's say, most of what I know about Roberto's career comes from books (Hands of stone, Four Kings), rather than watching him and his opponents careers closely. I pretty much only saw the major fights from that era and I'm sure others could(and probably already have) make a better pro-Duran argument here.

 

marcel and buchanan are both very impressive wins.

despite all the losses duran can still be compared to floyd resume wise, that's pretty crazy and shows how good duran's career was.

 

Duran has more KNOCKOUTS then Mayweather has fights.
Duran has more wins then Mayweather and it isn't by a few its quite a bit more.

These are to completely different animals and there really isn't a comparison.

 

Duran fought in a time where if you wanted to make decent money you simply fought- especially in the lighter weights that were not that popular at the time.