Leonard's disgusting late eighties era

Did Dubble say that the Moore, Barkley and Cuevas fights were better wins than DeJesus and Ken B... bwahaha lol. To prove this point, he appeals to the masses by saying... well the majority of being would say they were better. That is fallacy 101. Most people don't have a freaking clue about boxing or its history, and seemingly, you're doing a good job of fitting in with those masses. You're beyond wrong to think those were better win lol

 

So the much better fighter got waxed by Barkley twice and destroyed by Hagler? Odd line of logic. How did the older past his prime Duran do against those guys?

 

To prove my point I simply stated the obvious.

Which MAN would you rather fight? Which MAN would be harder for you to beat?

Not who was on some fantasy pound-for-pound list.

Duran, barely out of his teens, managed to low blow his way to a win over a scrawny 135-pound Ken Buchanan. And Duran, as a 36-year-old grown man, managed to floor and decision 6'1", 160-pound middleweight champ who towered over him and spun him around like a top on a couple occasions with his power shots.

It's pretty damn clear what the bigger win was ... if you reside in the real world.

Sometimes I think none of you have actually seen real fighters before.

Everything's some fantasy pound-for-pound game.

 

Why do you keep trumpeting dumb statistics. You keep sighting percentages that include fights well past his prime. Why are u including any fights at any weight past say 33? He wasn't is his prime then nor dedicated enough to keep his weight down. Yet you continue to parrot this ridiculous percentage including those.

 

Styles makes fights

Double chin's logic is wanting in this thread

 

Hearns knocked Duran out cold in a unification in a division where they both reigned as champs.

When would Duran EVER beat any version of Hearns?

Go right ahead. Pick any version of Duran. Pick any version of Hearns.

Tell me when Duran does a complete 180 and actually beats Thomas Hearns in the ring ... ever?

 

Styles make fights? You said 135-pound Duran was better than 154-pound Duran. So, who does 154-pound Duran lose to that 135-pound Duran beat?

Did I miss when Duran changed his style between those weight classes?

If you can't name one, maybe 154-pound Duran WAS NOT WORSE.

I pointed out guys - even ordinary welterweights - who would beat Sugar Ray Leonard when he got older - even if Leonard totally outweighed them by 10 or 15 pounds.

Because, at a certain point, Leonard was NOT as good as he was as a welterweight.

When was that point for Duran when he wasn't as good as he was when he was a lightweight champ? When would the lightweights he beat start beating him just as they were?

Most top lightweights can beat some crappy welterweight or middleweight.

Hell Prince Naseem Hamed, when he was a featherweight, used to bash Johnny Nelson (the cruiserweight) around the ring sparring.

The truth is Duran was better when he beat Palomino and when he beat Leonard and when he beat Moore ... than he was as a lightweight. Nobody who he beat (or lost to) at lightweight was going to beat the Duran who was beating Palomino and Leonard and Moore.

(If you disagree, name some.)

He continued to get better when he left the lightweight class and approached his late 20s and early 30s. And then he aged and started to drop off like every fighter does.

In his late 20s and early 30s, Duran was just fighting guys who were tougher to beat than the 5'4" 138-pounders with an average punch he was fighting when he was 22.

It's very logical, actually.

 

What stats? When does Duran beat Hearns? Ever?

Pick a Duran. Pick a Hearns.

See, it's real easy. I'll take Leonard in 1989 versus Hearns in 1981. The 1981 Hearns beats the 1989 Leonard ... even though Leonard had a good 13 or 14 pound weight advantage. Welterweight Hearns still beats 1989, middleweight/super middle Leonard. Because that Leonard was older, and slower and was more susceptible to punches.

Now when does Duran beat Hearns?

I'm saying ... he doesn't. Ever.

 

In my prime and with the luxury of fighting in my ideal division with the opposition forced to meet me there ? Barkley, cueves and Moore of course... by the way that "Scrawny" Ken Buchanan gave Duran a great fight over 13 rounds while Esteban Dejesus BEAT Roberto the first time they fought. This was when Manos Di Piedra was in his prime and at his best weight.. Hell Barkley, cueves and Moore all got their asses kicked when he was an aging blown up Jr. middle and middle.. remind me again which group of guys were better ?

 

83 Duran is only really a chance of knocking out guys that come to him (or don't move much) if we are talking half decent fighters. Even then it depends. 83 Duran is zero chance of knocking out Hagler. A cuts stoppage at best.

 

I like your posts, but citing a prime lightweight would not beat himself as a past prime middleweight is illogical and flawed. If it proves anything it is the man two weights up usually wins because of size, you cant use it to assess the quality of a man's career wins. Buchanan and De Jesus are clearly better quality wins as far as the abilities of the opposition are concerned. Both were great lightweights the fact that you would not pick them to beat Barkley or Moore does not indicate that they were not greater fighters.

 

You don't think that Holyfield being a few days off of 41 years old might have been a contributory factor?