Is Roberto Duran overrated?

Calzaghe is considered to have very fast hands. He's still slower than today's 38 y.o. version of Jones at combinations at mid to close range (even though Joe puts less weight into his punches), against 168lb version of Jones Calzaghe looks as quick as a turtle. Pacquiao has exceptionally quick hands. But compare his combinations to a prime version of Jones, and again Roy is without a doubt faster. Sugar Ray Leonard as an amateur had quicker hands than the pro version of him (which was still exceptionally fast), but to me he was slightly slower than prime Jones at either 160 or 168 lb.

Basically only Meldrick Taylor has showed speed (in his flurries) slightly quicker than Jones at his prime, but I'm thinking if we could make Jones same size as Meldrick, he'd be slightly faster than Taylor. The rest, Camacho, Davis Jr, Mosley, Whitaker, and the like, none of them had as quick hands as prime Jones.

 

But what is the point of all this? And why dont you reply to comments posters make?
I dont care if he was/is the fastest,hes not the best lt heavy in the world today....END of story......
If only speed was what made boxers great,meldrick taylor=no1 of all times at any weight....
Also,if have news for you,likely everyone of the sprinters in the olympic final over the last twenty years has taken drugs,as did jones who was caught......Put some of the old timers on drugs and see how much better they would have done before claiming jones as all time fastest guy.....
Is ben johnson faster and better than jesses owens?

 

Which fight(s) did Camacho throw quicker combos than 168lb Jones? Leonard was slightly slower to me (I have 9 his amateur fights to compare, he was quicker as an ama, than as a pro).

 

Subjectivity rules.....
And nicky hudson showed you a 37 year old who was amazingly fast for his age senya......Jones has no comp nowadays, speedwise,there is always comp in the 100m nowadays......

 

1) Comparison of greatness has nothing to do with either speed or steroids.
2) I don't argue against Taylor being the fastest of all time. Jones, in my opinion, is #2, with Leonard 3rd.
3) Jones was not caught at taking drugs.
4) Jones has been known for ultra fast hands since amateurs and has preserved it at such age where it's impossible to be helped by any drugs of the world, unless the speed was given to you by genetics. He's been showing them in every fight he's been in so far, and if it was attributed to steroids, that means there were 50+ chances for him to get caught about it.

 

He had a positive test for steroids v richard hall....Look it up....End of story....

 

Jones has only one man in all history who was quicker than him, it has nothing to do with today's competition, with amateur Leonard at best being a tie for 2nd place (pro Leonard was slower than prime Jones, it's easy to compare).

 

1) Test 'A' only, no test 'B' - no proof.
2) The authors of that letter that mentions anabolic steroids have showed pretty much zero knowledge about them, most probably confusing them with prohibited drugs, that were not anabolic steroids.
3) Androstenedione that is often mentioned as that substance he was tested positive for, was not on the list of banned substances at the time of Richard Hall fight, and was not even considered to be 'anabolic steroid' by definition at that time, so this version of what it was is false.

 

Subjectivity on the speed,and its plain he took drugs,you can twist it which way you want but its clear what was in his body was not gatorade......
Also,he is not as fast as he was,or are you saying even now hes faster than prime leonard and such like?

 

He admittedly took ripped fuel, there are no researches that have showed it increasing speed as far as I know.
He's not as fast as he was, but he is still faster than any other light heavyweight in history (those that have been filmed).

 

At the very least he is arguably the best lightweight that ever was, IMHO.

 

....

ESB-Classic has had the critique of glorifying Duran in the past. Some would agree, I would take a different view -that any boxing historian or student who does not recognize the greatness that was Duran simply reveals their own shortcomings.

On the one hand, some of the critiques here are refreshing ... but some are really off. I'm off to the gym now and will take out some of my frustrations. Later, I'm coming back without the taint of emotion but with all guns blazing.

Whoever would be reticent about placing Duran inside of the top 10 has alot of explaining to do. Whoever thinks he should be outside of the top 10 should either find and watch hours of film or find a golf forum and stay there.

 

as i recall, he did fight and beat jimmy heair. and he also beat top contender hector thompson, who had beaten jimmy heair.

 

No, he deserves to be rated as highly as he is.

 

yes he is.