If Duran face McCallum instead of Hearns, who you got?

actually I think I bring up good points and use facts. I am not just saying Duran was not great and then just posting that.

 

I don't care about Duran's starting off at 119 -you held it up for another fighter as a standard and I called you on it. Double standards aren't fair.

Duran lost because of his flaws, where's the excuse? EVERY fighter loses because of their flaws whether they are in their style or internal. Do you understand this?

Duran's legs became stiffer as he aged, MAG. Send a video tape of yourself playing basketball and we'll review it together.

Duran fought and lost against Hearns in his 17th year as a pro, 20 lbs out his natural division against a man who's dimensions dwarfed him. But these are just excuses. Hilarious.

Post your top 25. I dare you.

 

Even here Duran did not have weight problems like everyone else, he ate his way out of a division you say. Somehow Duran is different than everyone else. See how ridiculous this all is? Some would say he was having problems making weight as early as 76 or even 1975. But you say it is because he ate himself out of the division or growing out of it? I guess his trainers or Duran are who put out that story. What a way to excuse Duran again. If you could control any fighters eating and they worked out properly Hearns might have stayed at 154 until 1991. Some would say you control your growth by eating and what you feel you need. There is not much difference. So you actually think Duran could have stayed at lightweight another 5 years when most fighters move up in similar ways? So Arguello would have moved up and past up Duran and Duran stayed at 135 and Alexis at 140? This is the way Duran fans turn facts around. I respect you his fans, but I think that way of thinking or turning of facts does not respect other people's intelligence and certainly not boxing history. It is as though Duran looking good and having excuses is more important than what is true or correct. Duran's legacy is more important than the truth?

 

Who are you --Mike Trainer? You have more excuses for Leonard's loss to Duran than Leonard himself. And since you can't dispute it anymore than he could, you minimize it.

There are still two questions I am waiting to hear answers for:

Tell us when the last time was that another natural lightweight defeated a natural welterweight before Duran beat Leonard. When you're done there, tell us the last time a natural lightweight defeated a natural middleweight champion.

 

Mike McCallum.

 

....

I'm trying to be patient here. Really.

Read carefully.

Duran had flaws. One of his flaws was discipline in training. He was a glutton. As a younger man, he had high enough metabolism to burn it off, as he aged, that became more difficult. If Duran was disciplined and did not seek the glory of beating Leonard, he would have continued to dominate the LWs much like Hagler did the MWs only longer. He would have faced Arguello and the next generation if you will.

As it was, he was not so disciplined as he should have been. Get it?

Duran's competing against larger man was part laziness, part arrogance, and part glory-seeking. Get it?

 

I will be back later and answer these questions later which you guys posted to me. I had to comment on the Mike Trainer part. That was funny. Actually I never liked the guys around Ray, they were always phony guys like Trainer and Dave Jacobs who told Ray what he wanted to hear. Although Ray would have had it no other way. Jacobs went to Tommy in 81 and then went back to Ray of the 1989 rematch which was a little odd I thought.

 

I'm stubborn, duranimal. It's a character flaw of my own. But now, it's bedtime. Nighty-night.

 

Yes, I remember that too. Loyalty was never big in the Leonard camp.

 

jacobs was ok. not everyone can have a guy like Steward and Prentiss Byrd around them like Hearns did or Arcel with Duran. Ray treated his guys well and they stood by him. yeah Trainer was a phony type guy and you never would have seen Thomas Hearns dealing with a guy like mike trainer.

 

I kind of agree with mag on that this is an excuse. everyone likes to eat and young people have high metabolic action so how was duran any different than anyone else? Fighters are glory seekers!! that is why we watch them Duran had trouble making weight why not just admit it? Why does Duran have to have all these excuses. maybe his hands were made of paper also.

 

Duran greatest ever at 135 and pretty damn good if not great at 147. Duran's best scalps at 154 (Moore) and 160 (razor-close win vs Barkley) are not in McCallum's class either in terms of overall skill set or accomplishment. The bloated, under-trained Duran who got blown up by Hearns would also lose badly to McCallum - although not in as devastating fashion. Hearns was positively frightening that evening in June of 1984. Conversely, the fit as fiddle Duran who walloped Moore one year earlier would have had a great shot to beat McCallum. Duran became one of the biggest enigmas in the sport post November 1980.

 

Duran lost because of his flaws? Well flaws should work against his legacy. He is lucky he did not fight guys like Benitez or Leonard or Hearns all the time, or he would have lost often. Those guys who used the ring and made him work for getting his punches off were the ones who troubled him. Me playing basketball compared to an ATG boxing champion is irrelevant to prove Duran's legs were finished. Simply, Duran fought fine when he had the right style in front of him, and didn't when he did not. It was simple and very easy to see. He lost easier against Benitez or Leonard or Hearns then I ever thought he would. It was significant, yet the excuses are meant to do exactly that excuse his perfomance. If a man is out of shape I can see tiring gradually, but he was being beaten from the first round on in those fights. More significance. As for Duran being this short man, he was taller than Dwight Qawi. Duran was also no shorter than Juan Roldan who gave Tommy a good 4 round brawl. Against Hagler he didn't look small, nor did he vs. other guys. I do not think Duran is this little small guy who fought all these huge guys. Too many excuses for him. What I think is a little sad is how people buy it. As for the list. I will list it soon enough. I get that request often and I post it and no one makes a comment.

 

I understand you stating facts defending a fighter you admire. I do it myself with Hearns and a few others like Larry Holmes and Hagler.

 

That was Ray's fault he did not have good guys around him sorry to say. Ray wanted the yes men, and even his trainer Angelo Dundee was hired after he became well known. I do not agree that Ray treated his guys well. He fired Dundee and later Jacobs, guys who were loyal to him (well sort of Jacobs).