Roberto Duran. Overrated or what?!

NALLEGE · Jun 27, 2009

Lionel Rose said: ↑

Jimmy McLarnin was a better all round fighter than the one dimensional Duran.
Click to expand...

:rofl:rofl:rofl

joe the great · Jun 27, 2009

Duran was a lightweight champion. Lighter than the other guys who were welterweight champs. Duran won all the way up to Middleweight champion and fought guys at their weight. Leonard won Lightheavyweight but did it fighting the Lightheavyweight champ at 168.
Duran Split two fights with Leonard.
Got creamed by Hearns
But went the distance with Hagler.

Really tough to call. Got to give credit to Duran for beating Barkley who twice beat Hearns and he did it at 37 or 38 years old. He was a dominate Lightweight champ and had they had a Jr Welterweight division I am sure he would've won at that weight.

bladerunner · Jun 27, 2009

joe the great said: ↑

Duran was a lightweight champion. Lighter than the other guys who were welterweight champs. Duran won all the way up to Middleweight champion and fought guys at their weight. Leonard won Lightheavyweight but did it fighting the Lightheavyweight champ at 168.
Duran Split two fights with Leonard.
Got creamed by Hearns
But went the distance with Hagler.

Really tough to call. Got to give credit to Duran for beating Barkley who twice beat Hearns and he did it at 37 or 38 years old. He was a dominate Lightweight champ and had they had a Jr Welterweight division I am sure he would've won at that weight.
Click to expand...

that division existed back then.

REEVO · Jun 27, 2009

Lionel Rose said: ↑

Having just read George Kimball's 'Four Kings' tome - which was a good read, for sure - I just don't see Duran as being in the same league as the other three greats mentioned therein, i.e. Hagler / Leonard or the original 'Hitman' - Hearns.
Am I alone in my assessment of rating 'Hands of Stone' as little more than a street thug with only basic boxing skills?
Okay, he beat Sugar Ray fair and square in their first outing, but this was more down to Leonard 'not showing up' on the night, and Hagler giving him far too much respect in their match-up, resulting in probably Hagler's poorest showing in a world title bout.
I was miffed at Kimball's description of Kirkland Laing as merely 'a journeyman,' when, in truth, had he applied himself, 'the Gifted One' could surely have won a version of the world crown.
He boxed rings around Duran, only to get a majority decision against the 'home' fighter that night.
Duran was also most fortunate to get a decision against Scotland's finest, Kenny Buchanan, when, after hitting him 'south of the border' for the umpteenth time, Buchanan was unable to continue.
Not only was Duran gifted the stoppage win, but Buchanan was never granted the automatic rematch he should so obviously been granted.
No, Duran was just a determined little street brawler, albeit with much grit and determination when he was 'up for it,' but got well and truly found out against most decent quality opposition.
It's high time that the Duran myth was exposed once and for all.
Click to expand...

Overrated ? The man is a legend a 'All time great'.
. World title holder at 4 different weights.
. Voted by 'Ring Magazine' as the 5th greatest fighter of the last 80 years
. Was the second boxer to compete in five decades

Here is his record 119 fights, 103 wins with 70 KOs... This thread is abit of a insult to a true warrior. :twisted:

Lionel Rose · Jun 27, 2009

Who gives a **** what 'The Ring' magazine say?
Top 10 / 20 / 30 / 100........it's purely subjective.
It's absolutely impossible to say that one fighter from X era is better than another from Y era.
Any number of factors can dictate the outcome of a fight, and consequently one can only judge and accurately gauge a fighter by the contests in which he participates during his career - anything else is pure speculation.
Duran, undoubtedly a pure fighting machine, swept aside dozens of lightweights in the first half of his career.
However, under close scrutiny, his record that you mention, which includes 103 victories, looks fairly hollow when you could argue that a good 70 of those victories are against your proverbial 'Mexican roadsweeper.'
Yes, he took half a dozen decent looking scalps along the way, but I would still contend that he lost to too many of his contemporaries to be considered a true ring legend.
I know that I'm well outnumbered on this board, but hey, I ain't no sheep.
I'm sticking to my guns. Duran was overrated, and no amount of puerile abuse and petty mudslinging by so called 'experts' will sway my opinion any time soon.

REEVO · Jun 27, 2009

Lionel Rose said: ↑

Who gives a **** what 'The Ring' magazine say?
Top 10 / 20 / 30 / 100........it's purely subjective.
It's absolutely impossible to say that one fighter from X era is better than another from Y era.
Any number of factors can dictate the outcome of a fight, and consequently one can only judge and accurately gauge a fighter by the contests in which he participates during his career - anything else is pure speculation.
Duran, undoubtedly a pure fighting machine, swept aside dozens of lightweights in the first half of his career.
However, under close scrutiny, his record that you mention, which includes 103 victories, looks fairly hollow when you could argue that a good 70 of those victories are against your proverbial 'Mexican roadsweeper.'
Yes, he took half a dozen decent looking scalps along the way, but I would still contend that he lost to too many of his contemporaries to be considered a true ring legend.
I know that I'm well outnumbered on this board, but hey, I ain't no sheep.
I'm sticking to my guns. Duran was overrated, and no amount of puerile abuse and petty mudslinging by so called 'experts' will sway my opinion any time soon.
Click to expand...

Fair play to you very bold to come on here and make a thread like this... I enjoyed watching him and he did it for me as a fighter I believe the fighters back in them days had a bit more grit about them, and he is one of many that i liked... He 100% deserves his status as a great fighter. But im sorry I cant agree with this Thread.:good

Critic · Jun 27, 2009

yah, he's overrated!

REEVO · Jun 27, 2009

Critic said: ↑

yah, he's overrated!
Click to expand...

Really? atsch

Thread Stealer · Jun 27, 2009

joe the great said: ↑

Duran was a lightweight champion. Lighter than the other guys who were welterweight champs. Duran won all the way up to Middleweight champion and fought guys at their weight. Leonard won Lightheavyweight but did it fighting the Lightheavyweight champ at 168.
Duran Split two fights with Leonard.
Got creamed by Hearns
But went the distance with Hagler.

Really tough to call. Got to give credit to Duran for beating Barkley who twice beat Hearns and he did it at 37 or 38 years old. He was a dominate Lightweight champ and had they had a Jr Welterweight division I am sure he would've won at that weight.
Click to expand...

bladerunner said: ↑

that division existed back then.
Click to expand...

There was actually some negotiations for Duran to fight Cervantes when Cervantes was the man @ 140, but Carlos Eleta, Duran's manager, didn't want Duran to fight him.

Lionel Rose · Jun 27, 2009

with good reason, too....

duranimal · Jun 27, 2009

Lionel Rose said: ↑

Who gives a **** what 'The Ring' magazine say?
Top 10 / 20 / 30 / 100........it's purely subjective.
It's absolutely impossible to say that one fighter from X era is better than another from Y era.
Any number of factors can dictate the outcome of a fight, and consequently one can only judge and accurately gauge a fighter by the contests in which he participates during his career - anything else is pure speculation.
Duran, undoubtedly a pure fighting machine, swept aside dozens of lightweights in the first half of his career.
However, under close scrutiny, his record that you mention, which includes 103 victories, looks fairly hollow when you could argue that a good 70 of those victories are against your prove
Yes, he took half a dozen decent looking scalps along the way, but I would still contend that he lost to too many of his contemporaries to be considered a true ring legend.
I know that I'm well outnumbered on this board, but hey, I ain't no sheep.
I'm sticking to my guns. Duran was overrated, and no amount of puerile abuse and petty mudslinging by so called 'experts' will sway my opinion any time soon.
Click to expand...

You sad fu*kin *****:yep Do yer self a favour & just f*ck off back 2 the Michael Jackson pedo fan club website as what you don't know about boxing could fill a book:hi:

Critic · Jun 27, 2009

REEVO said: ↑

Really? atsch
Click to expand...

hahaha.. yah thats it..he's overrated! :smoke

REEVO · Jun 27, 2009

duranimal said: ↑

You sad fu*kin *****:yep Do yer self a favour & just f*ck off back 2 the Michael Jackson pedo fan club website as what you don't know about boxing could fill a book:hi:
Click to expand...

I think that is the problem, he has read a book that is full of ****... I have to say there has been a few threads on this site that has made me want to log off and never come back on this site, and this is one of them..

DINAMITA · Jun 27, 2009

NALLEGE said: ↑

Nobody knows how good Duran's early comp was because the names are not recognizable. It is why i don't put much stock into names, but the time you fought a guy. Name fighters count, but the stage of that fighter has to be determined. Duran is not even close to overrated, yet he is not greater than Leonard. Duran was brave enough to take on the best past his prime, and he did well win or lose.
Click to expand...

What do you mean his "early comp"? You mean his pre world title comp, before he won the lightweight title? I don't think that has much relevance to whether he is overrated or not. Judge him on his world title level career, which lasted from 1972 till 1989 (he also had a great win over Jorge Castro in the 90s).

DINAMITA · Jun 27, 2009

Lionel Rose said: ↑

Jimmy McLarnin was a better all round fighter than the one dimensional Duran.
Plus he moved up weight divisions and STILL beat legendary fighters, instead of merely surviving against the best of that era, a la MMH et al....
Click to expand...

Watch Duran v Ken Buchanan.

Watch Duran v Iran Barkley.

Then tell me he is one-dimensional.

Log in or Sign up

Roberto Duran. Overrated or what?!

NALLEGE Loyal Member banned

joe the great Boxing Addict Full Member

bladerunner El Intocable Full Member

REEVO Boxing Addict Full Member

Lionel Rose Guest

REEVO Boxing Addict Full Member

Critic Limited Edition Full Member

REEVO Boxing Addict Full Member

Thread Stealer Loyal Member Full Member

Lionel Rose Guest

duranimal Boxing Junkie Full Member

Critic Limited Edition Full Member

REEVO Boxing Addict Full Member

DINAMITA Guest

DINAMITA Guest

Log in or Sign up

Forums

Roberto Duran. Overrated or what?!

NALLEGE Loyal Member banned

joe the great Boxing Addict Full Member

bladerunner El Intocable Full Member

REEVO Boxing Addict Full Member

Lionel Rose Guest

REEVO Boxing Addict Full Member

Critic Limited Edition Full Member

REEVO Boxing Addict Full Member

Thread Stealer Loyal Member Full Member

Lionel Rose Guest

duranimal Boxing Junkie Full Member

Critic Limited Edition Full Member

REEVO Boxing Addict Full Member

DINAMITA Guest

DINAMITA Guest