I agree. He really lost the trilogy against Norton, and apart from that there were some fights only his name got him "W" on the record. I understand politics took away three years from his boxing career, possibly even the best years, but does it automatically makes him "The Greatest"?
He didn't have a great record at all, unless you're simply going by wins and losses. His resume is extremely thin for someone considered as high as he is. On the flip side, he was past his prime when he lost to Villa.
Sure, my point was not so much that Sugar was overated at 147, only that he failed to fight the best. At 147 he should have taken on Burley without question. At 160 Burley, Williams (who fought at WW too), Cocoa Kid (who fought at WW too), Booker were better than most of, and possibly all of, the guys SRR fought. That should be of concern that should be more widely known.
it hurts my heart to read this thread. espcially the nonsense about sugar ray robinson. to say he didnt fight ALL of the best guys of his era is like saying barry bonds isnt great because he didnt hit a home run every time a fast ball was pitched to him.
I don't know anything about Barry Bonds. I know that if you make a list of the best fighters he fought, then a list of the best fighters of his era in and around his weightclass that he did not, the second list would contain the better fighters. That's a fact as far as I can see. Your "not allowed" attitude is not a healthy one for understanding the history of the game. I have him in my top 2 at the moment and I've never had him outside my top 3. Understanding the situation doesn't call for any level of hate.
I would say all the Great Heavies are overrated by many, as they rate iconic status as well as ability. Same goes for three of the fab four. Tommy; because everyone loves him. Marvin; because some feel guilty because of his tough start and because they missed the best of him (which was in 77-80 IMO). And Leonard; because some overrate the other two, thus they have to by default overrate him to make up for it. Duran is not included as he is underrated by some because people amazingly forget his body of work pre Brawl in Montreal!
Duran - lost to every atg hes faced yet most have him top 10atg. JCC - Beat an overrated Taylor by Steeles blessing.
The fact that he came back after the exile and reclaimed the championship is an incredible feat, and Foreman, was pretty much considered invincible the way he handled Frazier and Norton. I was checking out some of Ali's pre-exile fights the other day and he was amazing, and post exile he was very much different. Almost like 2 different people fighting and winning the championship.
Kostya Tszyu...i dont know if he qualifies as a legend but some people here seem to think he is, saying that he could have beat PBF and or DlH in his prime, I dont think so. - Best win is over Zab Judah...a fighter (whose stock is falling with every loss), who has shown to have talent but a weak mentality in the ring. - Other career best wins are over Sharmba Mitchell who, though good was not great and was already beaten earlier in his career by Leavander Johnson a journeyman fighter (till he won the championship). Also beat former champ Miguel Angel Gonzalez who was coming off a 14 month injury layoff. -Beat a lot of faded former champions (not in their prime) i.e. JCC, Jesse James Leija, and Roger Mayweather. - Was in a life and death fight against Diosbelys Hurtado, a good but not great fighter. -Stopped by perenial contender, but past his prime Vince Phillips ( near 34 years old)..in an upset. -Quit on his stool, in a fight that was close against Ricky Hatton in his last loss. ...in short Tszyu was a very good fighter, who beat a lot of decent and good competition. But did not defeat a hall of fame fighter (in his prime), or anyone that is even close. Also got beat by a 34 year old "contender"(Phillips) while he was in his prime, and quit on his stool in a close fight (Hatton). Those are not legendary stats.
For me its Duran hands down. His only win vs another great was vs Leonard who was young and wanted to prove that he could beat Duran in his(Durans) fight. Most of the people that post here, I doubt ever even seen that fight because it was a fight much like the fight with Oscar and Tito, were Duran like Tito got the win, but very few actaully thought at the time that he won the fight. Over the years it has seemed to change and for some reason people now think that Duran won the fight fairly easy. Well that wasnt the case it was a one point win on the cards and in the minds of many it wasnt a win at all. The second fight was the easy fight in which Ray fought his fight and was winning pretty easy. And enough of this crap about Duran fighting over his best weight from 1974 until the 1980 fight with Ray Duran only fought 7 of his 32 fights under 140. I have never known another fighter to lose all but one of his biggest fights be seen as a top all-timer. And he was past his prime. He lost to Hagler, Leonard, Hearns, Lang and DE Jesus all before he was 34 years old. My biggest problem with Duran isnt so much his loses to great fighters, but the wins??? he doesnt really have the wins that compare with other fighters around the place on the atg 4p4 list. A shakey win over Leonard, and a win over DeJesus is about it. People will talk about his win over Barkley, but come on how impressive is a win over a 20 loss fighter:huh Im not trying to change anyones mind about Duran only stating facts, fact which have caused Duran to fall down the list of atg p4p fighters over the past 15 years. Over the next 15 i would guess that he is barely in the top 20 as other fighters from this era and the last era start to enter those lists.