why do people put duran ahead of pac on atg list???

yeah but no can you imagine what pac's record would be against those same fighters. and duran nearly beat hagler. imagine the kind of massacre it would be if pacquiao fought hagler.

 

Duran has fought better opponents than Pac has.

I personally rate Pac that high(top 25) because of the way he's been jumping from weight to weight, and not because of his level of opponents.

 

The point is not how he would do against Leonard and Hearns and Benitez and Hagler, it is that Duran is not worthy of ATG top spot or top 10. I think Pacman would have a very hard time vs. that level, but Duran is the one who fought them and was 1-5 (0). Fact is Pacman did have fighters at 130 to fight who were great and at his level than Duran did. He had Morales and Barrera. That helps his legacy. And I do not think Marquez is in the great category to be honest.

 

no, you can consider his level of competiton as well because pac ahs a fine resume but other guys have better resumes. and lots the fighters have jumped weight classes, including duran himself, and he did so fighting better fighters from lightweight to super middle weight

 

Duran had one loss when he fought Ray, but close. That loss was to Dejesus who he beat in the next 2 fights. Ray when he fought Duran fought the wrong fight.

 

duran isnt the 1 p4p of all-time or maybe not top 10(thats debatable) but he still is suppose to be considered better pac because of his entire body of work, not just at 130. and if you dont considered marquez to be great, well that same guy arguably beat pac not once but twice. all in all, pac has to do alot more to be consdiered better then duran. first thing is to beat mayweather which will be quite a tall task for pac.

 

He wasn't grinning with Benitez or Hearns at 154. Barkley was not a great. The only thing Barkley ever did was beat a great, but he was not a great. Duran beat a guy who beat a great, and that is a great win? Tommy Morrison beat Buster Douglas who beat a great, that is not like Morrison beating Tyson. Duran lost to Hagler. That was a boring fight until Hagler pored it on in the late rounds and almost stopped Duran. That is why I think Hearns is greater than Hagler. Even though Marvin beat Hearns when Tommy moved up in weight, Tommy has the better wins and fought more ATG caliber guys.

 

Ok I agree with that, Pac's level of opposition is very good, but just not that good to be ranked that high, that's why I only rate Pac that high
because of the way he has jumped in weight class.

 

This content is protected

 

So you are happy to rubbish any excuses Duran fans come up with for his losses but then you have no problem towing the line with that rubbish? Again MAG you love your double standards when it comes to Duran. If you werent so transparent with your hate Id probably agree with a lot of of what you say..Duran in the top 5 alltime is to high, I have him around 8 or 9 and I agree that is pretty high..about as high as you could justify.

I have no problem with people who have him in the 10-15 category...I dont think 15-20 is right or an educated conclusion but each to their own...Outside the 20 is just taking the ****.

Leonard fought the wrong fight ...Biggest myth in boxing history...Ray had 15 rounds to fight "his" fight and couldnt.

 

well you can move up in wieght and fight bums too. mayweather moved up wieght but fought questionable opponents and is criticized for it. same thing roy jones did. pac moved up but fought class opponents. guys who ranked high in their respective divisions.

 

Pacman is one hell of a fighter, hes awsome, in this era. No way Pac can last against leonard, duran, hagler, hearns, benitez, cuevas, and the list goes on. Pac is great but he doesnt transend eras liek other fighters.

 

He didn't have nearly the competition at LW as Pac, and if you throw out the SRL victory he got a steady stream of losses against every great fighter above lightweight. Davey Moore was **** as a champ, and his only really big win outside of SRL was Barkley. It's only because he was able to **** off SRL to the point where SRL fought Duran's fight instead of his own we have to hear all this mess.

Duran had longevity, granted, but that's pretty low down on my list of great accomplishments fighters can make. There are probably a ton of shitty fighters who fought for 25 years. Obviously Duran wasn't undersized at WW, considering the weights he went on to compete in. He just wasn't as good as Benitez, Hearns, or SRL. Not absolutely, and not p4p. Was Duran a badass? Absolutely. That doesn't change the fact that he is and always has been the most overrated fighter ever to walk the face of the earth.

 

Yep, that's a real problem and a total indication of a lack of talent, that a guy who WALKS AROUND at 145 couldn't beat a quality MW champ like Hagler atsch

 

number one, Douglas never fought morrison, at least in the pros anyway and munber two, barkley isnt an atg but he was still a big, good, tough mw and duran, being a former lightwieght, went up and beat him. by your strange standards you cant be impressed by pac beating cotto because how high does cotto rank all-time in ww standing? and the duran-hagler being boring has nothing to do with the fact that duran fought argubably the greatst mw of all-time and gave him hell, in a fight most though hagler was going to dominate. when did pac ever fight such a fighter?