Duran Not Hype Witness for Yourself True Greatness

I have yet to see a list. Maybe i just missed it.

You are aware that Hearns never won a round vs hagler right?

 

Hagler never made a claim of wanting to fight at lightheavyweight,or being considered a great lightheavyweight.His whole professional desire was to be considered one of the best middleweights ever.The fact that many people disparage his accomplishments to this day(not you,mind you) or try to hold him "accountable" for not fighting Spinks would indicate that even at middleweight,he will always have his detractors for whatever reason.

 

Wow....he must have been pretty good for a "nobody", considering that he stopped Thomas Hearns in three rounds for the WBC middleweight title in his previous outing....oh wait....let me guess....Hearns was "past prime" too....and the Virgil Hill who Hearns went on to beat for the WBA light heavyweight title?....I know....another "nobody".

I guess it is over-discussed though, considering all the 37 year old former lightweight champions who are winning middleweight titles these days.

 

This thread definitely went into left field...

 

Not as long as MAG'S got a hole up his arse will he ever want to see anything other than his own warped view regardless of the amount of times he contradicts himself.

God forbid you that you ever end up in court on a minor charge such as jay walking & you see MAG sat as jury foreman (Obviously) then you can expect the death penalty as he'll find a way to justify it

 

Look up Dick Young's scorecard.

 

the fact is that Hearns beat Hill the best guy at lightheavyweight and Tommy was 32, and Duran did not beat the top guys Hearns and Benitez. Duran lost to the better ones and beat the mediocre. Hearns lost to the mediocre but beat the great. I think that means more.

Duran lost to all the greats. My point is that is significant. Good post though.

 

I didn't disparage him. I was ranking who I admired of the fab 4 or 5 if you count Benitez. Hagler never moved up and proved he could win a title when he does not have the strength advantage as a barometer. Marvin acted like Hearns and Leonard and Duran had to move up, yet he never made a move to fight Spinks and he didn't even respond to Michael Spinks asking him to move up. I was making a point why I liked Hearns. Hearns fought the best and knocked out ATG fighters and won 3 titles from legends Pipino Cuevas,Wilfred Benitez,Virgil Hill. and beat Duran in what should have been a unification. I think that resume is great. And Tommy is underrated. Duran lacks wins over greats and gets too much credit. That is my point. It is simple really.
Duran fans are funny. If you do not believe what they believe they call you closed minded, yet if they never change about Duran they are considered open minded? This is odd reasoning. My opinion and theirs will not change which probably makes us both closed minded. I have brought up good points.

 

Look at it this way. Barkley was 3-4 in wins and losses in the 3 years from the Kalambay fight to Benn 87-90. Like I said I knew Duran would win when the fight was signed. I know styles and I saw it happen. When you can predict easily who Duran would beat and not beat, then you pretty much figure what he is good at. Great fighter. Dominant, likes guys in front of him and on the inside, but his feet are wide apart, and his lightweight reign was great, but not great names. so what ranks him 5-10 ATG? Nothing he has done. Ray was the variable in that fight, not Duran. You guys have overrated him. I am not the only one who believes this, I have seen about 20 guys who believe the same thing I do. My ideas are not that original. I do think he is 25-30 on the ATG list.

 

Brlliant

 

shut your mouth Hudson, this has nothing to do with you

 

I have given them good facts and they do not have many answers. So it was a good discussion from my perspective.
Roberto was great, but not what Duran fan's say. Lack of great wins over great fighters. Anyone's record can be embellished or made to look better. That is quite a jump 25-30 made into 5-10, and without anyone bringing up good points in how he is rated 5-10. I have never seen a fighter boosted by a fight like the first Leonard fight and Barkley fight, yet not having to explain fights around the same time where he lost to Hearns/Benitez/Hagler and Leonard in the no mas. Like I said earlier, there is a different standard for Duran.

 

I been saying this for years. But after reading this thread I find myself posting virciously through you. Your comments mirror mine, but are far more informative and concise. :good

 

For me your blind spot is not considering this from a p4p perspective. Duran wasn't suppose to beat the Leonard's, the Hearn's, the Hagler's or the Barkley's..he was too small, and too old. The fact he beat a couple of them and held his own against Hagler is remarkable in that context.

It would be similar to Pac beating a near prime Hopkins. Or since Pac started out smaller, a prime SSM.