Behold your false god, Roberto Duran

Gil Glancy a great analyst.

I just wanted a rise out of you, I think Orlando is very good.

 

Like I said, you were talking ****. :good

 

Duran's accomplishments at 135 are great, but above that it's somewhat sketchy. He has a fantastic win over Leonard, but it will be always tainted by the most embarrassing quit job in history he pulled during the rematch. Beat a good welter in Palomino and a decent middleweight when he was old. Other than that, he lost to the better fighters there (Hearns, Hagler, Benitez) and also a mediocre one in Laing.

 

How many fighters do we judge by what they accomplished past 30 years of age?

Also, you forgot the Moore victory.

 

Well apparently Tua's performance last night at age 37 after several years inactive, prove for the classic forum that he was always nothing more than a hype job

 

Yes, often for this forum, antiquated means better in a strict linear sense. No qualitative assessments of how the game may have changed in so many facets. No, the farther into the dim recesses of time one fighter's birthdate is, the better he gets. That is about the extent of historical perspective one can really expect in these parts.

 

...What? :think

 

Well, you want to count the Moore victory, fine, but then you also have to include the losses. Can't have it both ways.


As for your first statement: If you want to rank him in the top5 pound-for-pound, then you better have more to show a victory over Leonard followed by a devastating defeat and several other losses at higher weight, aside from a dominant lightweight career.

 

Leonard gets judged for his "past 30 years career" all of the time, namely that he cherrypicked a shot Hagler, drained Lalonde, tried to take advantage of a shot Hearns, and picked on Duran (despite the fact that he was coming off what many consider to be one of his best performances at the higher weights).

Accomplishments past 30 years of age still do wonders for a career. (most of Lennox's best victories, Ali of course, Hearns upsetting Leonard and Hill, Hagler was around 30 when he fought Hearns, etc.) If you accept Moore, Barkley, Palomino, and of course Leonard, it's necessary to accept that he suffered a fair share of defeats and was terribly inconsistent.

 

Who ever says this?

 

Monzon gets monstrosly underrated here by almost everyone. Napoles is very overrated.

 

Well usual suspects such as Duranimal, Redrooster, etc. but it has also arose lately on General, as SRL versus Mayweather threads have become more common.

My point is, Leonard's post-30 career is certainly up for scrutiny, and the same holds true for Duran. The only difference is that the flaws in Leonard's victories/defeats are scrutinized in equal measure, whereas Duran's are brushed aside by saying "they were big and he was small", past-prime, unmotivated, and such.

 

You had me going there for a second