Top 5 most overrated boxers of All Time

Duran? Duran in his 30s proved himself against a younger man. Leonard didnt.

Again, you're just not ready for me. You wait till you get to be a man!

 

Why? Leonard wasnt shot. That's why they made him the big favorite vs Norris. Why do you insist on forgetting?

 

You JUST said fighting "superior competition" will turn a man into a "broken down relic" at a relatively early age. So according to your logic then, Duran must not have been fighting "superior competition."

Neither must Walcott have been, either.

 

You mean the way they made Norris a big favorite vs. Mullings and Rosenblatt? atsch

:rofl

Why do you insist on forgetting?

 

So where do you rank the almighty Keith Mullings?

 

Jackson in a head to head match, will always be higher then Norris, but Mullings, Rosenblatt, Boudouani caught Norris when he was shot to pieces and couldn't hardly pronounce his name properly.

 

And Norris caught Leonard in his prime at his optimal weight class?

So many contradictions.

 

When did I say Norris fought a prime Leonard?

Show me one single post where I said that Leonard was prime against Norris. What I did say is that yes Leonard was past prime but not a shot fighter. How is that a contradiction?.....Its simply a difference of opinion. Reading comprehension should be in order here.

 

You're wrong, stop talking.

 

No more than Norris did when he fought Leonard.

 

This is Boxing Bro not Tennis so enough with your problems with Durans behavior, He is one of the most intresting charachters in boxing and Greatest fighters ever and thats is why he is so admired by Boxing fans. Boxing needs fighters with outrageous personilties once in a while. I think some of the reason Duran appealed to fans was because of the crap you talked about him. Everyone loved his meanness and mystique of being a bad ass. Not everyone could get away with it and be so loved,but Duran was one of those that could.

You should read up more on Duran he really is good person deep down,helps alot of people and not for publicity either.

 

Getting your ass beat by a prime Norris at 154 is not an indication of being shot but getting beat by Keith Mullings is.

The Leonard that fought Norris would blitz Keith Mulling and you know it. This debate is going in circles and quite frankly I'm tired.

Is that chick tits in your avatar real?:huh

 

So was every other fighter Mullings beat in his career "shot" as well?

Prove it.

The Leonard that fought Norris never showed he could still blitz anyone, and the Mullings that fought Norris was never blitzed. Yours is a completely unsubstantiated claim that actually contradicts all the facts.

 

I was never the one ranking Ray Leonard #11 p4p. Blame them, not me

 

That's it, just a little slower? That's Eddie Futch, the New York Times, and Norris saying he lost just a bit of speed. Not enough to justify the 11th p4p ever (according to ESBers) getting a beat down

Whereas Gil Clancy and Leonard himself both confessed Hagler lost alot of his speed/

Losing a lot of your speed and dropping a split on points is justifiable. Getting shut out to Norris isnt