Had Duran beaten Hagler and Hearns in 1983-84, would he now be viewed as the GOAT?

If Duran had beat Hagler and Hearns i think he definitely would be ranked higher then Robinson by most people. Hell he's top 10 in many peoples minds right now.

 

Id rank him a firm 3rd. SRR, Ali, Duran. IMO even though there isnt that much peak footage of SRR, his resume littered with HOF speaks for itself. Ali too with wins over Frazier, Liston & Foreman + many others IMO would rank 2nd. Ali is quite underrated by some.

 

****ing hell....a guy who is a natural LW beating one of the best MW's of all time....it still shocks me that he was as competitve as he was in there....

He would be up for serious consideration thats for sure.

 

Tough to say, though I'd probably say I'd have him number 1. That would be wins over one of the top few welterweights in history, the best light-middle in history, and the best middleweight in history, in addition to his sheer dominance at lightweight.

As for what your "friend" said to you, eye-witnesses insist that Robinson at welterweight was better than Robinson at middleweight. And the footage of Robinson at middleweight is still the best fighter I've ever seen. The man went 128-1 fighting the best! You can't dispute a record like that, and given the amount of footage available of him, his argument doesn't have too much merit in regards to Robinson. For fighters with little footage such as Greb, Walker, Jofre etc. it has some merit, but their records speak for themselves. The only thing that is difficult to gauge is head-to-head ability with these fighters due to lack of film.

If a fighter today went and "won 15 world titles at 7 weights and retired on 75-0", beating the best along the way, then there is no doubt that they'd be ranked accordingly. I think your "friend" is severely overstating the old-timer bias.

 

had he beat Hearns and Hagler he would definately be number one in my view.

 

If he had beaten either one of them then perhaps #1, definitely top 3 IMO, but what happened in the rematch with Leonard would probably still hold him behind Robinson on most lists I would guess. If he had beaten both then yes, he would be the GOAT, period.

The thing is he never would beat these two (Montreal Duran perhaps could have beaten Welterweight Hearns, but I wouldn't favor him).

A more probable scenario is if he had fought Benitez at Welterweight while still in his prime and won, and a win over Cervantes in the 70's or Arguello, and if he would have just lost a decision in the rematch to Leonard instead of quitting, I think #1 would be reasonable.

As it stands, he's a guaranteed top 10 anyway IMO.

 

I think he's in with a shout regardless. He was a monster. Had he won then he'd definitely be many peoples choice.

My opinion is somewhat void in this discussion as he's my favourite of all time. (Possibly due to that flawed genius persona)

I think the old timer bias is more to do with the fact that very few fighters put themselves in a position to be compared i.e the best fighters nowadays dont take on all comers and rarely fight the same number of fights.

Also there is a case for arguing that due to its dimished importance boxing does not necessarily bring the calibre of fighters into the sport in the same way it used to and therefore the level of competition in professional boxing cannot be compared to previous generations.

Personally i've never been a fan of hypothetical time travelling match ups so dont get involved. However if we just stick to compariing legacies then the trend in boxing seems to be moving away from anyone emulating Durans achievements. I think the fan/ media obsession with the "0" is part of the problem.

 

Of course. Its hard to argue if you hold wins against SRL, hEARNS, and Hagler.
Im glad the ******* gets dropped like a tree against Hearns

 

In my opinion, he would never be the GOAT because he quit on his stool. Does the phrase "No Mas" ring any bells? You cannot be the greatest when you choose not to get off your stool when there is no injury from stopping you.

 

Wow - good question. He'd certainly be ranked even higher - although he's still among the best p4p of all time IMO. One of my favorite all time fights was when a past-his-prime Duran beat a HUGE Barkely at MW... that fight showcased his talent(s) and solidified his p4p greatness (not that he needed it, though).

 

LOL He wasnt on a stool

 

Ok, well whatever, you know what I mean.

 

He would more then likely be in my top 3 with Armstrong and Robinson.

Off topic I honestly do not see these guys ever getting knocked those spots in my list. I think it is literally impossible for someone to be able to match Armstrong's achievments now and Robinson...well he is just what God would be if he took up boxing.

Duran is probably my favourite fighter of all time by the way, on any given day he might hold the no1 spot in my book (if he had done what you said PAC) but mostly I would have him a clear number 3.