Floyd or Duran - Most skilled?

WTF ?
This might be my new signature !! Thanks.

 

Cut it out,we live in the internet age where you can see virtually any pro fight that ever happened... Real boxing fans have watched the greats,what skill set specifically does Duran hold over Floyd.. Toughness,is not a skill set,is he quicker on his feet,reflexes better,is his timing better,can he adapt to any situation?

Quick answer is nah,he couldn't and that is not a knock on Duran,but if we are talking about skills at least say in what area..

 

Your not allowed to say that!!! Only baseball,foot ball,hockey,tennis,track
etc.. are you allowed to say athletes have evolved.. :nut

 

Yeh now fighters dont even have to step in the ring and fight they have something called "twitter wars" and theres things call message boards where twats like you can say the dumbest things like the one above and think you're saying some ground breaking **** when in reality its just the same old dumb **** that know nothings like you come up with.

 

Body punching, combination punching, pressuring skills, inside fighting, inside defense, inside positioning, upper body movement, defensive on the front foot, feints, better right hand, better jab, equal timing, ability to seamlessly incorporate offense and defense, offensive angles, fluidity, etc.

...and I need to address "Quicker on his feet" - that's not a skill-set. Otherwise Pacquiao is just about the GOAT.

 

This is true: clowns like Napoles, Gavilan, Robinson, Basilio, Griffith, and Rodriguez have been replaced by advanced technicians like Bradley, Berto, Lara, Alvarez, Williams, and Cotto. Let's not forget the advancements made in the heavyweight division. Or the light heavyweights! Foster, Conteh, Galindez, and the like look like cavemen compared to Dawson, Pascal, Sillakh, Cloud, and Shumenov!

 

That's the complete opposite of the truth. Fighters today are nowhere near as technically gifted as they were 40+ years ago.

 

True.

Hell most fighters today dont even have a decent proper jab.

They rely too much on physical gifts and dont bother learning the basics.

 

:deal

 

No it hasn`t, we`ve all got eyes in our heads... boxing is not athletics.

 

Exactly. Look at the heavyweight division for further proof of that. Instead of guys getting in the boxing gym and working hard on their technical issues, they're down at the bodybuilding gym adding muscle which is frankly unnecessary or adding fat because they think weight alone is a bonus. Or look elsewhere at fighters like Andre Berto who has a brilliant physique for modelling but not for boxing. He has a huge upper body and legs like twigs. That is ridiculous. It's detrimental for a fighter to have a big, muscular upper body and if they are going to pack muscle on, it should be on the legs. Realistically, Berto should be 10lbs lighter than he is because he has excess muscle but I guess he wants that sort of appearance for aesthetic reasons and also because he, falsely, believes that such a good physique will improve him as a fighter.

There is far too much emphasis on strength, height and weight in modern boxing. You could click on any debate on here and within 5 comments, you'll see someone saying "Fight A has an inch more reach and weighs 2lbs more on fight night, so he'll win!". It's stupid. Boxing isn't about cavemen slugging out at each other and whoever is the bigger stronger guy wins. It really is the 'Sweet Science' and the sooner boxers start focusing on improving technically and forget about building an aesthetic physique, the sooner boxing will benefit as a sport.

If you want to look at who does it properly in boxing right now, look at the guys who are also fighting within their proper weight class. Mayweather, Pacquiao, Froch, Hopkins, Marquez, Ward etc., are all guys who are fighting at a weight limit which suits them. Yet again, fighters are hurting themselves by trying to be as big and strong as possible by cutting weight, a method which can be drastically detrimental to a boxers ability to win a bout.

Technique in boxing will always be the deciding factor, not size or any other physical strengths.

 

This is a ridiculous thread, mainly because most people are gonna go with the fighter who they seeing more of a fan of, in my honest unbiased opinion you don't know much about boxing if you actually believe Duran is more skilled than Floyd...

This era of fighters are greatly disregarded and underrated when it comes to Hearns, Leonard, Duran & Hagler, as good as these guys were they are not the end all be all of boxing and Roberto is not more skilled than Floyd, but since he didn't have the chance to face these so called "Boxing Gods" his resume is not up to par, I'd be impressed if one of the "Fab Four" would have went undefeated against the other three and not lost to less than elite fighters in the process...

 

Nobody yet has been able to actually spell out how Floyd had more skills. Floyd fans have only distracted from the issue talking about how Duran is overrated and how his voters are biased. Duran has displayed impressive performances against greater fighters with disadvantages Floyd has never had. The gap in greatness is due exactly to Duran's skills. Not his "chin" or his "toughness", but his ability to hit and not get hit against bigger, quicker, stronger, younger fighters, with a number of HOFers and ATGs in there as well both in and out of his prime.

Do you honestly think Floyd would do better against Hagler?

 

Can you break down the areas that Mayweather has the edge and vice versa?

 

Nothing but nothing but right :good