Who is greater? Manny Pacquiao or Roberto Duran?

Roberto Duran.

 

90 idiots voted for PAc lol... 29 year old Duran beats a 25 year old Sugar I believe. Who did Pac beat that was even remotely close to Leonard at age 25 lol...

 

Who has anyone beat that is close to leonard?

 

I don't think Pac is greater than Duran, but jeez Duran is really overrated.

He's the most dominant lightweight ever, first lightweight to become welter champ jumping up two divisions but its like the valleys of his career are glossed over and ignored.

Can you imagine if Pac quit in one of his rematches like Duran? He would be crucified. Plus its not like Ray was giving him a beating. Duran was just ...........losing........and called it a day.

He was the only one of the Fab 4 to lose to every one of his counterparts. I give him credit for coming up in weight so far, and doing great but if he's included in the Fab 4 his record has to be taken into account.

I think his charisma/machismo gets taken into account to much when a lot when rate him.

 

the most idiot voted for duran and he claims to be a former world champion. What a clown! :yep

 

Because he was the oldest and smallest.

 

Duran was not far from his peak when he fought Leonard. I don't believe this. He had just turned 29 a week before the fight if I am correct. That is past his peak? Not really, especially if he fought until he was 50. Pacman has speed and that is what gave Duran trouble, and that is what gives most of Pacman's opponents problems. His workrate is very good. I am impressed with him. I am not sure that workrate will work well against Mayweather who will neutralize it, but against Duran it might. The only problem Pacman might have against Duran is that Pacman does seem to get hit clean enough, yet his momentum and speed wins him the fights he is in now. He has good resiliency and momentum and speed. Really it is hard to know what would happen with Pacman and Duran unless they actually fought. It is hard to gauge how fast Pacman would be against Duran, but the fast guy like Leonard and Benitez and Hearns were guys who easily beat Duran, which is significant.

 

He was not that small. He fought at 154 before any of those guys did except for Hagler. Benitez won his first title at 140. Duran was not old. He fought Ray when he just turned 29 and fought Benitez when he was 30 and Hearns and Hagler when he was 32. He fought until he was 50. At the same time people are giving him excuses for losing to all the legends, he is given credit for beating Moore and Barkley. You cannot have it both ways. If Duran was a little washed up fighter when he fought the legends, why is he given ranking points in the ATG list when he fought Moore and Barkley? He was not washed up when he fought the legends, just that those guys were too deep in talent to lose to him, and Moore and Barkley just couldn't get to that level.

 

I have to admit I am surprised at this poll. I would think Duran would have outpolled Pacman like 5-1. But this isn't even 2-1. Pacman has 97 votes as being greater. I am surprised.

 

Why does so many people wants to compare Pacquiao to a Legend? Seriously...

 

People's short term memory is much better than their long term.

There is a dude in another thread saying floyd is better than henry armstrong.

 

Some people think Pacman is a legend. If any current fighter is a legend it is Pacman.

 

Duran didnt stay in the shape pac stays in nor did he have the power pac did.

 

that was the excuse he used everytime he lost to a legend. When he didn't fight a legend who had great skills, then he would win against Moore or Barkley and he was miraculously in shape. This is why I know it was excuses. Had he beaten a legend but then lost to Moore and said he was not in shape it would have sounded more logical, but to lose to all the legends and not train for the legends, but train for mediocre fighters is excuses to me.

 

101 clueless dickheads have voted for Pac... likely because its a closed poll - again.