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

I think that Duran defeated men more dangerous than the version of Canelo Alvarez that Mayweather defeated.

 

At no point has this ever been said and you know it.

 

No surprise. Mayweathers goal wasn't to fight the most toughest dudes out there he could. It was to fight the guys who could earn him the biggest paycheck.

 

The purpose of this thread SHOULD be for us all to have an OBJECTIVE debate of these guys’ careers. Both by looking at statistics, and allowing for context, to see who had the better overall career.

It should be a fun debate, where many factors are considered.

That’s not what’s happened though, as that’s not what you want.

 

Playing the very predictable ‘I didn’t read’ card, is probably the most cringeworthy and pathetic retort that one could give.

You’ve done this with several posters, when you haven’t been able to counter what’s been said.

Now anybody reading this who’s read my posts, KNOWS that I’ve been concise, where I’ve broken everything down into detail.

Again, every fact that I’ve written can be backed up.


An IV for dehydration DID NOT make sense.

Once again, he could never have been dehydrated to the point of needing one.

Once again, even IF it had been legit, he still wouldn’t have acted in the manner that he did, where he broke several rules.


Nobody has claimed that he took PEDS after the weigh-in.

Again, by you claiming that that’s what I’ve said, shows us that you have no idea what you’re talking about.

 

it has been a fun debate. a lot of people have said sensible things.

floyd and pac have very different resumes, duran's another level, good and bad.

if i was forced to pick i'd go floyd-duran-pac. that's no disrespect to manny, it's just the way i view things.

 

It’s been fun in parts, but you’ve got a biased TS who’ll only focus on numbers, without allowing for context. And then when someone gives him something he can’t counter, he says that he didn’t read it.

It would have been a much better thread if someone else had created it.

 

there'll always be a clown.

duran floyd pacqaou resume is about as divisive as a debate can be. you know what you know, you can read what the majority says.

 

before i say anything, 3 legends, no disrespect to any of them.

i'd say duran had so many more quality wins over so many more years. no mas is a huge stain, if you are solid that that is the difference i would have no argument.

 

i wouldn't say pac had any embarrassing loses. duran did.

that's how thin these resume comparisons are.

there's a few guys like charles, robinson, ali, greb, ross. maybe langford and a few more including floyd, duran and manny who did so much they can't be shaded, obviously weaker fighters can, but why? obvious things are obvious.

i just don't care about ranking people. great is great. there are levels but once you are great you did it. once you are very damn good you did it, once you are very good you did it.

how many soccer or nfl players are great? those guys are immortalized but their whole team helped them do it, there was a specific plan where 11 guys helped 1 guy do good. boxers did it on their own. most of the incredibly good fighters wouldn't make my top 100 all time.

 

manny doesn't have a win like duran leonard 1
duran doesn't have a win like leonard hears 1
leonard doesn't have a win like pac hatton.
it means so much and it and it means nothing.