Is Duran an overrated lightweight?

He's rightly hailed as one of the very best at this weight,imo. How many other all time great lightweights would anyone say could beat him ?

 

I agree that he would n't be unbeaten,but on a 'league' basis,I see him coming out on top. Don't forget,though,that Leonard was welter.

 

For quite a long time he's been my choice as goat lw. But now that I think about it, i'm not sure it could be argued that he achieved more than leonard nor beat better people at the weight.

Duran was dominant and never lost as a lightweight but the only guy who scored a meaningful lightweight victory over leonard was welsh and that was avenged numerous times.

I think i'd have duran number 2.

 

If you rank solely based on resume then its clear that he its not the goat. Leonard, Gans, and Williams are probably better. Maybe Ortiz. Whitaker did even less at the weight although he's still a great lightweight.

 

we will never know if kenny buchanan was great becase he was unlucky to come along at the same time as duran and was wrongly not given a rematch.

I think his acheivement in beating ismael laguna in LAGUNAS backyard and in adverse weather conditions, was absolutely great. laguna was a great fighter

I do agree with you that duran would of struggled greatly with pea and whitaker but you cannot deny durans greatness at 136

 

Depends of your criteria.....if you give a huge value to resume more than anything, Duran can´t be rated at first....but there are many other things to consider, he was incredibly skilled, one of the best in these terms p4p speaking, so.....all things considered, he isn´t overrated.

 

He deserves to be in the top 10 lightweights of all-time.
Every lightweight in the top 10 is seriously great, because it's such a stacked division.

 

Ability wise he's great, he has 2 great scalps and I've come to accept his second tier ones are a tad underrated. It's just his fans go a bit crazy in their boxing analysis

 

Not best lightweight. A glance at his record shows that the opponents were carefully selected. Only Dejesus had more than 50% KO rate and that was just barely.
Much ado was made about Duran's amazing punching power but from what I saw his power shouldn't be considered when talking elite punchers. His KO's we done over the long haul and he was a good slugger with great endurance, so he'd just grind his opponents down.
Arguello, Roserio, Valero were harder hitting lightweights and that's just a few of the champions since. The commentators went into overtime speaking of him being best puncher pound for pound, but that was more to drum up interest in this fighter with an exciting style.
Hearns and Julian Jackson, now these are guys with punching power.

 

Roberto Duran is without a doubt, one of the Top 3 Lightweights of 'All Time'.

No reason to go any further.

The only bouts that he could have added to his list during that time;

A) A rematch with Ken Buchanan in 1973 or 1974.

B) A bout with WBC Light-Welterweight Champion - Perico Fernandez in 1975.
Perico was willing to come down to 135 lbs. to fight Roberto in May 1975.

 

I'm curious how Williams resume is better.. He had WAY more losses at that weight that Duran... You can't be considered the best when you have that. Whitaker... While I do have a man crush on him.. and he's one of the best all time... his resume at LW is few and far between. IMO the only LW you could put above duran is Benny.. and even then.. I think Duran beats Benny and it would be that close. It would be more competitive than close.

 

Duran was a great lightweight, top 5, he was strong at 135 and could have stayed there with the right condition. His drinking soda pop, alcohol,and eating all things helped him blow up but even at 147 (Duran vs Leonard 1) that Duran would be among the top 10 Welterweight of all-time