DURAN the GREAT..31 years ago TODAY

I don't even know who rooster is. I think Duran is great, but I think Duran fans have this thinking that Duran losses to all the greats he fought since he is out of shape, then since he is a lightweight that beating Moore and Barkley somehow is the same as beating Hearns and Benitez. In no way is not beating ATG fighters beating ATG fighters. And the fact about Duran being small when he fought at 154 is ridiculous considering he fought at 154 as early as 1978, before Hearns,Benitez or Leonard ever fought that high in weight. The excuses for Duran are big and he is overrated a bit. A great fighter but absolutely overrated. He had trouble with fast fighters who used speed and knew how to win. Especially his fights with Leonard and Benitez and Hearns. He had 4 fights where he could have broken down the fast guys and he lost all 4 when they were fighting their fight. And Duran was dominant at lightweight in a not great era. I say his dominance and the Leonard win (regardless of Ray fighting a dumb fight) warrant him 20-25 ATG. no higher.

 

Redrooster.

He's a ****in' legend on here.

His particular fetish is Leonard.

He's the biggest Leonard hater on here. Never gives Leonard credit for anything.

I've had a few spats with him over the issue, but I gave up when he asked:

"Who has Leonard ever beaten other that Duran, Hagle, Hearns and Benitez ?"

He didn't even see the humor when it was pointed out.



You are his soulmate, except that your target is Duran.

You do know that (former LW) Duran defeated Barkley when Barkley was coming off a 3rd round TKO victory over the hitman.

 

sure I know that. But if you are going to use Barkley as a barometer for anything, Kalambay,Benn and Nunn all beat him around the same time. Barkley still is not Hearns and Moore is not Benitez. Same as if Davey Moore beating Kirkland Laing, that is not beating Duran.

 

right there about Rooster is something. He says things who has Ray beaten but those guys.. He is not saying anything legit if he uses that logic. I bring up points that Duran really did not beat many ATG fighters.

 

Stating, as you did, that Duran's win over Leonard was NOT GREAT is on a par with any of Redrooster's nonsensical downgrading of SRL.

 

Very few boxers beat many ATG fighters. By definition, there are only a tiny handful of ATG fighters in any given year. If we allow 100 ATG fighters, that is 10 per decade. Across 8 weight divisions. So, there will be on average 1 ATG fighter in a weight division every 12.5 years.

Because of that, it is rare to see ATG fighters even match up with each other. Usually it is done by going up in weight - so it becomes an unequal contest. For example, Duran was a natural lightweight - some of the ATGs he fought were Leonard, a bigger younger man; Hearns, an even bigger younger man; and Hagler, an even bigger younger man. See a pattern here? He was a 30something man, fighting younger guys 1-2 old weight divisions above his prime weight - and these were boxers who were top 10-20 (Hagler & Leonard) and top 50 of ALL TIME. On paper he should have been demolished in every one of these fights, even if he was the best lightweight ever. Yet he only got demolished against Hearns, he beat Leonard once, and was very competitive with Hagler. If beating Barkley was so trivial, how come fellow ATG Hearns couldn't do it, over two fights? And Hearns wasn't a 38 year old former lightweight!

Also, you are overlooking that if you are the dominant champion at your natural weight, then you *prevent* any of your challengers being considered ATGs. Who knows, maybe Ken Buchanan or DeJesus would have been considered ATGs if Duran had not been around.

Another point is that beating everyone, even if none of them are ATGs in your weight class, is still incredibly difficult. If it were easy, more ATGs would have done it - yet we see many ATGs who could not dominate and clean out their division for 5+ years.

In other words, your whole point of "if you haven't beaten many ATGs, you aren't an ATG" is complete bollocks. You need to learn the basics of how to assess the standing of fighters.

 

Last time I checked, a boxing match is scored based on what was actually done in the ring on the night. "Coulda, woulda, shoulda" is not one of the categories that judges score fights on.

 

Without all the greats as you say fighting, Duran was fortunate to have 4 greats to fight in his career. All of them different sizes and styles, with the same common denominator-they were as quick and knew how to use the ring.

Beating ATG fighters doesn't have anything to do being great? That makes ranking great fighters open ended. You can put anyone you want as a great and construct boxing how you like it to be. With that logic I say Virgil Hill is rated number 5 ATG. 25 title defenses and two titles.
There has to be a criteria. What will people say next, a great fighter does not have to beat good fighters? My point was not that Duran was not great, but I think he is overrated. A top 1-10 ATG fighter has to beat fellow ATG fighters. If he didn't then he is not 1-10. Leonard beat 4 ATG fighters. Hearns beat 3 ATG and 4 HOF when the 4 were champions.

There has to be a criteria for greats. Spinks beat Holmes in the first fight and the rematch, and I thought that fight there was a much greater accomplishment than Duran beating Ray.

Duran had the ATG fighters to match up against and he lost to all of them. And it is significant in light of the fact Ray beat them all. Benitez was not a huge fighter compared to Duran (first title 140 pounds) and actually was maxed out at 160. Wilfred's fought great at 154, but 160 was his max and Duran could fought decent at 168, yet Wilfred outclassed Duran at 154. This is all significant. My point is not that Duran is not great, it is that he is overrated. Absolutely. Stylewise as much as I dislike Floyd Mayweather's style of boxing, he and Whitaker would have outboxed Duran by UD at either Lightweight or Welt.

Too much is put on Barkley. Like I state over and over Barkley lost to everyone he fought except Hearns. Kalambay,Nunn, Benn (stopped in one round) how is that a great win? Completely overrated win against a guy whose style I knew Duran would beat. When I heard the fight was signed I thought, this is the only way Duran can become a champion now fighting Barkley. Everything Barkley did from crouching on the inside to keeping himself open and being as slow as Duran gave Duran the easy chance to win that title. Barkley was not great. Then with Hearns at 32, Tommy beat Virgil Hill at the same age Duran was when he was stopped by Tommy in a unification fight for the title in a weight Duran was champ. And Moore? 11 fights. A guy with 11 fights is going to beat Roberto Duran? Maybe you guys don't have much confidence in Duran.
Pattern is regardless of excuses, Duran's buddies Hearns,Benitez,Leonard and Hagler had more conclusive wins against fellow legends than Duran did.

 

well there were 6 nights Duran fought greats and his record is 1-5 (0), and many of the excuses Duran made which were bought by his fans were woulda shoulda and coulda.

 

Yes but they were all younger and bigger than him, he should have got starched 6-0 in lopsided beatings. Before Duran even fought Leonard he already had a top 20 P4P ATG legacy, he was something like 71-1 and had cleaned out and dominated his division for almost a decade. Going up in weight and beating a younger, bigger, prime Leonard, a top 15 and maybe top 10 P4P ATG, is arguably the best victory in boxing history. You know, the same Leonard that Hearns, Benitez, and Hagler couldn't beat. That alone is enough to put Duran top 10.

 

Good post,Jersey Joe

 

This made me laugh so, so hard

 

beating Leonard in a fight where he did not stop Leonard and a fight where Ray was only in his 2nd title defense of his first title is not something which gets a guy top 10 ranking. Why not put Tommy as top 5 ever for beating Virgil Hill since Virgil was much more accomplished in 1991 than Ray in June 1980. Virgil in 1991 had enough experience 11 title fights, not to fight a style which would benefit Hearns since Tommy beat Virgil at Virgil fight of jabbing and counterpunching. The fact of Ray easily beating Duran in the rematch and rubbermatch is the story of Leonard/Duran.
The fact you say Hearns,Benitez and Hagler couldn't beat Leonard is proof that the Ray who fought Duran in June of 1980 was not experienced and fought Duran's fight. He outclassed Duran and beat him easier (also in the rematch) than he beat the other 3 when he fought the rematch. The rematch puts to rest any argument who was the better fighter Ray or Duran, and then Ray beating the other legends. And then Benitez outclassed Duran just a little over a year after Ray fought Duran in the rematch.

 

are you ******ed? Read his whole post. And really? Stopping someone being such an important criteria?

 

a top 10 ATG fighter will not be 0-6 against other greats or 1-5. A 1-5 guy with Duran's lightweight competition and long career yet lacking wins over fellow ATG fighters gets him 20-25 ATG ranking.