Duran Not Hype Witness for Yourself True Greatness

**** off you grooming troll:smoke

 

This fight just illlustrates what is already known. That roberto is simply ****ing fantastic. He defied the laws of physics in there. Thats what makes me laugh at those trolls and haters who dismiss this win.
NO lightweight champ in history could EVER do what duran did in there,NONE,ZIP,NADA.
No 135 champ would go 15 competitive with peak hagler,and none would beat prime ray leonard.
We will forget the utter dominance at 135,and the wins in 'over the weight' matches,we will just remember those three performances.
And i will tell you this,i think all of the fab four are great,as is pac,but none of them can rival the greatness duran displayed in these three fights.

 

Having lived through that era and actually actively disliking Duran I can tell you that this result and fight is amazing.

After the No Mas and the Benitez and the Laing fights he came back to find his redemption against Moore. Then he puts up an underrated and valiant display against Hagler (nothing to do with Marvin giving him too much respect and all to do with Duran’s game plan). After that he gets sparked by Hearns and was once again a laughing stock within the US print media. He was not filmed in the studio for Hagler-Hearns because he was so fat he was embarrassed. There wasn’t a boxing writer in America who didn’t pitch in a cheap shot at Duran. When he came back against Sims and lost he was ridiculed. When he came over to the UK to spar with Benn he was considered to be a fat drunk.

Then he goes and beats Barkley who had just KO’d Tommy Hearns.

When I looked at Duran I started to realise that this was a boxer who fought no matter what the odds. I started to see him in a different light. He took on bigger, younger and fresher guys. He didn’t have a zillion stipulations in the contracts and for that I started to respect him. Then when he had that 3rd fight with Leonard (who had said he’d never rematch Hearns or Duran only months before) I found myself for the first time wanting Leonard to lose. It was obvious Duran had no chance. And it was obvious that the fight was made so Ray could have his name on his record and proclaim a 2-1 victory.

I understand that Duran often offended American sensibilities, but why any boxing fan would want to put the man down I just don’t get. He came from the slums. He came from a very poor country. He won his titles abroad. He fought for longer, and at higher weight classes than he should have, and he was an amazing fighter. Compare what he did to the top fighters of the last 15 years…it isn’t even close.

 

Who the hell is doubting Durans greatness? :rofl:rofl:rofl

 

MAG thinks Ray Leonard was green for Montrael and that a 37/38 year old former Lightweight bouncing Barkley around the ring doesn't constitute as a great victory or achievement.

 

exactly. I think Duran needed Ray to sit there and fight Duran's fight,and I think Barkley fought Duran's fight since Barkley didn't know any other way to fight.
Why this overrating of Barkley? The guys middleweight record at that time was more losses than wins. In the 3 years from his middleweight fight with Kalambay which he lost by UD,, to Benn 3 years later he fought 7 times with a record 3-4. That is a great? And why is it so ridiculous to mention Ray being green? He boxed Duran in the rematch and he fought him in the first fight. The fact he boxed proves he was going to fight his fight this time around and he made Duran quit.

 

Mag,i dont know if your trying to convince yourself,or just hopelessly biased.
I love hearns and leonard and hagler,benitez is cool to,as is manny pac.
See you can be a fan of boxing without 'hating' on other fighters. You should try it.

 

I have tried it. I apply it. I cannot give a fighter credit when I do not believe he deserves it.

I like objectivity and ranking fighters by performance and wins against greats. How is that hating? That is just being reasonable and fair. Duran loses to all the greats in the 1980's and then has an excuse for all the losses, I do not think that is fair to his opponents.

I have never said I dislike Duran. I like him I think he has a great personality, but I am looking at his fights. So if someone makes a comment which does have your favorite fighter as great as you rank him, then that is hating? Interesting reasoning. Look at all my posts about Duran and find anything where I say I do not like him.

Objectively nothing can convince me that Ray could not have boxed in the first fight the way he did in the second. He started off flat footed in the first fight. Duran's fight was more flat footed, so the one who could switch off is Ray. Ray was the variable. When Ray changed his way of fighting in the rematch he won easily and made Duran quit. So that proves it was Ray who was the difference and boxing and fighting his fight. Objectivity.
With Barkley, Duran didn't have to get Barkley mad, Barkley was already fighting his fight. That is why the 3-4 record is significant. Look at most greats who fought at thier original weight. 3-4 is not a great record. Barkley was good and exciting at times, but not great. No way you can make him great. I like Barkley. I loved hearing his comments after a fight. I wish he would have had more wins because he deserved it, but he just didn't have many other ways of fighting.

 

I don't understand what is so hard to grasp about the Barkley victory. Duran didn't have a great deal left by 1989, he was almost 10 years removed of his prime, and operating four divisions above his optimal weight. Barkley, although not a great fighter, was coming off a career defining victory over Hearns and was the reigning Middleweight champion of the world. He would go on to win titles at 168 and 175.

It's like Erik Morales winning a world title in 2014 at 140lbs or 147lbs. It won't happen, and it's doesn't matter if he's fighting a Ricardo Torres level of fighter or a Manny Pacquiao level of fighter, if he pulled it off it would be a monumental achievement. Duran should not have been winning any world titles at that age, especially not against such a huge, formidable hitter like Iran Barkley. If you can't understand that then...I can't help you.

 

Dont worry addie,you cant help him.
He can only help himself....

 

I knew Duran would lose to Barkley when I heard about the fight.

Duran fought until he was 50 years old. Fighting 12 years before was not a fighter who didn't have a great deal left. Duran fought 27 times after Barkley. He had enough left.

I am not one of those guys who thinks a guy loses to Hearns or Benitez or Leonard or Hagler when he relatively young and makes excuses, and then gets older and beats Barkley and because he was older that automatically is a better win than had he beaten Hearns or Benitez years before. It isn't. Beating Hearns and Benitez when he was in his early 30's would have been much better for his legacy than beating Barkley who was 3-4 in those 3 years.

Duran was 37 and was not a mover. He was a great inside fighter and fighting Barkley and beating him was not a great win. You will not convince me. I remember the day it was signed and hearing about it and thinking Duran is going to win a title and he doesn't deserve it. He is being given the best style for him. I knew it. So in light of that, you expect me to give him credit? I knew he would beat Barkley. Barkley was fighting on ESPN 2 years before his fight with Duran. He was not great. How can you make him great? I don't care if Duran was 57 when he fought Barkley, Barkley was not great and Duran did not beat a great fighter.

Your reasoning is that if Duran is 37 that if he fights a champion even if he is not good, just by showing up and doing ok that means he is great. Doesn't matter if years before he was easily dismantled by Hearns or outboxed by Benitez and Leonard. It was a good win. It does not help his legacy. What it does show is that he was a good enough fighter when he fought Hearns and Benitez 5-7 years before the Barkley fight, and if given a good style with a guy fighting his fight he wins. The Barkley fight actually gave more credit to Hearns and Benitez.

 

No...I can't help you, MAG. I'm not reading anymore of your overdrawn posts that repeat the same point over and over, you just can't understand Boxing knowledge. As I've said before, that's your problem...don't make it mine. Read some books, have a good time.

 

no one asks you to respond to my posts if you do not want to, you do it and respond and ask questions, and when I respond with points and facts you answer with simple comments because you don't have anything else to prove me wrong with. I don't understand boxing? Well that is an opinion. Not really proved but an opinion nonetheless.
If you proved something I say is wrong that would mean something. But you don't. That speaks for itself, because the facts about Duran and his style and opponents speaks for itself, and deep down you and other Duran fans have to know Duran's win over Barkley is overrated a bit.
But what else is there to prove he was great in the 1980s? only his wins over Moore and Barkley, and without the 1980's Duran's lightweight reign supposedly gets him rated 5-10 ATG ever? And how could it? It was a good reign, but not 5-10 worthy. For him to be 5-10 worthy he needs a win over Hearns and Benitez and beat Ray in the rematch. He didn't have it. Duran fans have to overrated Moore and Barkley for any argument, but that will never get him to the 5-10 level. He is 25-30 ATG in my mind.

The 1980's were important because that is the era he fought the greatest fighters he would ever fight.
I respond to whoever comments to my post. I am redundant because I believe what I post. I have not changed my opinions in 20 years on Duran. I knew he would beat Barkley. Call that boxing knowledge or knowing styles or whatever you want, but Duran would not lose to Barkley when he was still relatively young. Now put in Duran with a champion like Kalambay in 1989 and he loses 120-108. Put Duran in the ring with Hearns in 1989 and he loses by knockout in a rematch. Styles make fights.

 

We don't disagree on everything then.