Just finished Hagler-Duran...

I love how you're so willing to excuse fighters for losses when it suits you (Hearns against Hagler, Leonard against Duran I, etc.) but take the opposite extreme when the excuses don't suit your opinion.

You're one poster I can surmise pretty well doesn't have a very high IQ. Either that or your bias it just that pronounced.

 

Comedy Hour at ESB: Open Mic Night

 

You can't be serious.

 

Mag seems like a nice guy, but when it comes to boxing, his opinions are so tortured that it hard to even follow. he is one of those guys that makes it a waste of time to even have the fights. Because he ignores the outcome if he doesn't like it anyway, and then starts twisting things around.


And if you listen to him, you would think that Duran started bixing in 1981 at 154. he will never ever ack that fighters like Hearns and Hagler had size and age advantages against Duran. he will come up with arguments that will amaze you to try and deny this.


He has told me in the past that Duran was actually a bigger fighter then Hearns.

And like we have seen here, Leonard was not in his prime when Duran beat him, but Duran was in his prime when Hearns beat him. This is just the tip of the iceberg. He also says that Hearns put up a better fight against Hagler then Duran did.


He doesn't rank Duran that high, but when I ask for a list of fighters that he ranks ahead of Duran so we can check it out, I never get an answer. I do rememeber him telling me once that Michael Spinks should be rated higher then Duran. Which of course was funny.

Mag, give us your list of fighters ranked ahead of Duran. Just a list. I don't want a list of fighters who have beaten more all time greats then Duran ( which is what you always turn the conversation into), just a list of fighters that you rank ahead of Duran as all time greats.

 

Good win by Hagler and great performance by Duran who was the first chalenger to go the distance with Hagler, Hagler did seem to take it a bit easy but it goes to show how good Durans defence was. Close but clear to Hagler.

This is why Duran is top ten and Hagler is not.

PS MAG is nuts when it come to Hearns and Duran.

 

MAG becomes nearly as annoying with his Duran-hating as redrooster was with Leonard.

 

Who said Roberto Duran's win over Ray Leoanrd, was not a peak Leonard.

What the hell does that supposed to mean.
A win, is a win.

 

Those last two round by Hagler showed who was who in that fight. Everything else mean't nothing.

I love to think it was close but it wasn't.

 

A proper Marvin should have stopped Roberto Duran in 8 Rounds.

Much like the way Roberto dismantled Davey Moore.

 

Dempsey had a far more golden brown *****, and had a great advantage in smooth texture. You are just ignorant and ignore the many MANY experts who know more than you and I about fisticuffs, who said Jack had the smoothest, brownest ***** of all time.

Manbearpig :hey:hey:think:thinkatschsmoke:happy:hi::bbb

 

Then why didn't he?

 

Though Marvin won, his road to victory was a disappointment.

It would have been like Carlos Monzon going 15-rounds with Jose Napoles.

Too big of a stage, to lay an egg........