Incidentally,i rate leonard as in the top three or four boxers p4p since robinson,he wasnt just a pretty boy at all. There just is no comparison between duran and hoya,resume wise,head to head or otherwise... Even the bizarre logic you have pulled in this thread makes no difference at all. If YOU want to believe oscar is comparable or better than duran,fine,but in no way is that 'objective', or agreed upon,nor will you find any knowledgable experienced boxing person to even remotely agree with you...
Exactly. Duran=top 10 in most peoples minds Oscar-His resume/skillset isn't worthy of a top 50 spot IMO
no i never made that claim. My claim is that Duran is overrated because he's a bad boy and De La Hoya is underrated because he's a pretty boy. Never said at all he has the better resume...why do i keep having to explain this..i asked these specific questions...Did DLH fight more elite fighters than Duran? yes he did. Did DLH have more success than Duran over his greatest opposition? yes he did. Stop adding to it. Stop factoring things in i havent even mentioned. You guys are so quick to rush flailing in to his defense that it prevents you from answering a simple, straightforward question, without going completely off the simple, straightforward answer. And this proves the massive double standard he recieves from you guys
If you think hoya had more success over his best opposition And fought better opposition than duran,then whats stopping you saying hoya has the better resume? And i have explained that leonard (and even ali.) are pretty boys that most rate highly... Who says hoyas pretty anyway?
Stop putting ****ing words in my mouth. Sereveral, several, several times i have repeated the questions. He fought MORE...MORE..elite opposition. A greater number of elite fighters. And he won MORE of those fights than he lost. The numerical value of DHL's elite opponents equates to a greater amount than the numerical value of Duran's opponents. The numerical value of wins DHL had against his elite opponents equates to more than Duran's.
So what point are you making? Is there a meaning behind these so called alleged 'facts' you are spouting forth? Red is a color,fact....But does it mean anything really? Go and think about an informed response,dont swear or hide behind words or dry logic,tell us what you REALLY mean,and dont be scared to spell out your conclusions from your 'data'...
Maybe in a world where Gatti is 'elite' and Ken Buchannan is not I notice you ignored when I called you on this, let me refresh your memory Originally Posted by Pachilles This content is protected 3) Who fought more elite opposition? Lets see how many elite fighters they fought. Duran - Ray Leonard, Hearns, Hagler, Benitez, Cuevas, Palomino, Camacho, De Jesus = 8 De La Hoya - Whitaker, Julio Cesar Chavez, Shane Mosley, Manny Pacquiao, Mayweather Jr, Trinidad, Vargas, Mayorga, Gatti, Camacho, Quartey, Hopkins = 12 You will argue that Duran could beat any and DLH cant beat any, but here is fact. Elite opposition they fought.. Either your ignorant or your letting your bias obscure any objectivity you may have. Gatti, Mayorga and old Camacho are elite? For Duran you missed: 1. Prime Ken Buchanon - arguably a top10 lightweight of all time in his prime. Better than a past prme Chavez, vargas, Mayorga, Gatti, Old Camacho, Quartey and arguably Tito and Molsey 2. Barkley - WBC MW Champ who beat Hearns twice. Duran was much smaller being an ex bantamweight and won. Better win than most of Oscars especially considering the weight jumping 3. Moore - 154lb Champion 4. Mamby 140lb Champ 5. Castro - future MW champ, most had Duran winning both fights despite him being mid 40s 6. Camacho - despite beingin his mid-40s most had Duran beating Camacho
maybe the fact that Ray had to have things his own way after LOSING, yes LOSING to Duran had something to do w/ it. Had to have lower weights, ring size, rounds, gloves, etc. Duran asked nothing, he just fought. Maybe if you ask, DLH will send you an autographed picture of him wearing the women's clothes.:asskiss:hooters