Poll.. Who do you rate higher p4p. Roberto Duran or Muhammad Ali?

Duran certainly is a loved man here on ESB.

Both were the best ever in their best weight classes (Duran at LWT & Ali at HWT)......
Duran was a bit more complete a fighter as he could body punch, infight, box from distance & had a great defence aswell......
Ali rarely went to the body & didnt like to infight but his jab, footspeed & combinations made him a nightmare from distance vs anyone......

Ali was a master at avoiding having to use his weaknesses & sticking to his strengths.... Duran didnt have many weaknesses, perhaps guys with good feet were his biggest pain in the ass.

Both guys had excellent chins & hearts but Ali has an edge in both IMO.

Both fought some of the very best ever but Ali was more successfull in these ATG bouts.


All in all.... both guys had truly wonderful ATG careers but IMO Muhammad Ali was the best at their peaks.

The way Ali adapted later in his career when he lost the footspeed was astonishing too. Legendary.

Muhammad Ali was better than Roberto Duran p4p for me.


Botswana :smoke

 

One way to compare their careers is to break them down in two parts.

Duran's "first career" would then be until he moved up to WW and Ali's up until the exile. Here Ali's first career is the slightly better IMO. He was unbeaten and his win over Liston is greater than anything on Duran's record during this time.

During their respective second careers Duran has the better wins and the greater longevity, though. But he also has more and worse losses, and just as Duran gets credit for performing great feats at weights above his natural one when past his prime, Ali should get credit for dominating a very good HW division when aging and with a long lay-off behind him.

All in all, this is very close IMO. I haven't reached a conclusion yet, and haven't voted for that reason.

 

On second thought it's doubtful if Ali's first career was better than Duran's, seeing how many, many wins Duran had.

Fukk, am I going to have to go for Duran after all?! Not fair.

 

His main weakness was outside the ring which resulted in him showing weaknesses when he stepped inside it. Duran was fully aware of his shortcomings, even in his prime, when not training and hanging out with his friends. Many times he phoned Eleta asking for Brown and Arcel. He would say "where are they, I need them". Some fighters are in denial with themselves about going off the rails between fights, Duran wasn't one of them.

Stonehands is someone who can expand on this more.

 

No Willie Pep ? :think

 

This line of argument is a bit akin to criticizing Burley's ranking over Floyd Mayweather Jr. because Floyd didn't have the quality of opposition that he would have had in the 40s and 50s. One way to look at it in other words is "tough luck"...

A HW is at a disadvantage if one puts too much weight on "performance in higher weight divisions" as a measure. For the record, I consider it kind of a bonus measure, but longevity and dominance are just as weighty in my mind. Taking points off of Ali for not fighting Titans is almost if not just as
unfair as taking points off of Hagler for his not fighting Spinks and co.

I see it as a something to consider. We KNOW that Duran was VERY highly skilled because you don't beat younger guys almost twice your size if you are not. That being said, I think that 2 of Duran's wins after 1979 and one 15 round points loss are close to if not absolutely unprecedented.

Which division -LWs or HWs- have the greater fighters historically? It's an easy answer and it illustrates the point of that comparison.

Smaller guys are better overall. They always have been.

As to your point about Ali being undefeated for his first 30 fights. Okay. But let's be fair here. Duran was undefeated over his first 31 fights too, and then went on to reach 72-1 -having avenged the one loss with 2 stoppages of the same. And he had 46 more fights to go until he was 50. Ali had 61 fights total and was really done at 37.

Never mind where the respective casts of opponents rank in their divisions, where do they rank in sensible all-time lists? This is a better measure.

You also have to look at context:

* You write that Duran's record against champions and ex-champions are "not a bad run I suppose." Look at it again. Name another natural lightweight in history who beat a MW champion. Then try to think of how many natural LWs could have went 15 with Hagler. Duran was the only title challenger to go 15 with Hagler. The only one.

* I'd challenge you to find a more impressive Ali win than Duran's win over Leonard. Helll, find another natural LW who defeated a WW champion in history! You have to go back to the 00s. And Leonard is an ATG great WW. Ali's win over Liston and especially Foreman are very impressive but where are they in your ATG list? Anywhere near Leonard? No they are not. That win alone launches Duran skyward.

Ahhh, this reads nicely and seems to be compelling, until you look closely. You began this post with a statement about the unfairness of penalizing Ali because Ali didn't conquer larger men as Duran did. If you fail to acknowledge that Duran was 72-1 in 1980, that is, already great, and you hold the losses over his head as if it were NORMAL for a man with a LW frame to compete against an ELITE WW, the best JMW who ever lived, and an ELITE MW, then yes, you could place Ali over him. But does it still seem so right....?

...I have Duran anywhere from #4-6.

* He's got more Longevity than Archie Moore.

* Dominance in his natural division.

* His skill level is obscene.

* Adaptability? He began as a pressure fighter/puncher. He was a boxer-puncher in 1978, a swarmer in Leonard I, and developed into a counterpuncher in his 30s. In his 40s he more or less became a trap-setter relying on experience alone. The last time he had physical advantages was 1978. He retired in 2001. Think about that.

* Win/lose ratio? 72-1 is a great record against solid competition. And don't forget that win against Buchanan at age 21.

* His willingness to accept challenges should be unquestioned. Sure he loses points for no mas and that inconsistency as he aged. But don't deny that this man would fight anyone. Anyone. Even Hagler had to tip his hat to him.

* Only a handful of smaller guys outshine him against bigger guys. Mickey Walker is a good example. But Mickey was a larger man to begin with. Duran was a lightweight. LWs just don't do this. WWs do. MWs do. But LWs don't.

....damn, had Duran been superhuman --had he maintained that fire and trained consistently for 119 fights against larger, younger, stronger, faster men, lost like a champion should against Leonard, and beat Hearns, he'd be #1. The fact that he only declared himself a human being after 73 fights shouldn't blind us to his greatness.

 

Great post!

 

This is an interesting question. Its tough due to Duran moving up weights while Ali obviously couldnt. If I were to put them both in their ideal weights ( Ali - Heavy, Duran - Light) and had to bet the mortgage on one of them to beat all other all time greats at their own weights id have to take Ali. That said LW probably has more genuine lb4lb atg than heavy. Durans win over Leonard is one of the best of all time at any weight so ill lean to him for this

 

Does anyone know how many wins Duran has over ranked opposition?

 

Conteh... would you believe that Ali and Frazier were both physically comparable, when comparing the FOTC and the 'THRILLA'??

Was their own physical nature the same?? Strength... Stamina..

Can you name a H/W who took the punishment that Ali took, in the FOTC??


Ali was far from the same person Frazier was in the FOTC.. when compared to the 'Thrilla'.

The differance I put forward, bieng the endurance and ability to absorb the level of punishment. Frazier clearly dished out more to Ali in FOTC, than Ali dished to Frazier in Manilla.

 

Just thinking of Heavyweights,Cobb v Holmes comes to mind,Jeffries and Burns against Johnson ,whilst one was stopped in the 14th rd and the other in the 15th,both took a bigger belting than Ali.
Dempsey in his two 10 rounders aginst Tunney had both his eyes closed ,and in the first fight had to be led out to congratulate Tunney.Frazier undoubtedly took more sustained punishment in the" Thrilla ",than Ali did in FOTC ,Joe's head was like a football.
Charles also took terrific punishment against Marciano .

 

....................................
Argentinian Luis Spada, who managed fighters including Hilario Zapata, Rosendo Alvarez and Duran heard his final bell on Saturday in Panama. He was a great behind-the-scenes man who some of you will remember once told Duran to give him a call even if he just needed someone "to carry his spit bucket". Duran did after No Mas, and Spada guided him through that first comeback, until the loss to Simms.

This was a good man who was good for boxing. May he rest in peace.
................................................

 

:good:good

 

Obviously I am not a fan of P4P either if people can simply cherry pick the best qualities of a fighter while conveniently dismissing his faults. I also thought it was a complete look at his skills,chin,heart, work ethic,performance against contemporaries,H2H,etc.........

If a fighter like Duran isn't prepared to fight in a Championship fight( an excuse sometimes made for Duran) is this excusable behavior of an ATG? If a fighter quits(when he is not even really hurt) against Leonard because he is fustrated,confused & embarassed (See RD 7 of Leonard/Duran II) should he be given a pass?

In my lifetime I have never seen more excuses given for the failures of a fighter as I have seen given for Duran & Tyson. Is it becuse of their macho images & exciting fight styles fans are enamored of them & will find ay excuse to protect ther legacy?

The abilty to overcome adversity INSIDE & OUTSIDE the ring should count for something huh? Isn't that a quality you would want in an ATG. The excuses given for these guys only tarnish them further in my eyes.

I did watch several of Duran's 70's fights (DeJesus I,II & Palomino) & he is certainly a great fighter ,but no matter what the Hearns annihilation,Leonard embarrassment,Hagler,etc.... will be etched in my memory. Those three guys along with Duran were the best Smaller divisions had to offer(late 70's/80's) & he was dominated by them.
P4p is bogus if all a fighters attributes, physical & mental, aren't taken into account.

 

sugar,

mental attributes are taken into consideration. Yes he quit against Leonard, you'll find that several great fighters quit in a fight, but he proved in other bouts that he wasn't of the quitter mentality.

He came back from a knockdown in the 2nd DeJesus fight against the only man who had ever beaten him to take control and stop him. Is that not overcoming adversity? He stayed in the entire fight with the much bigger Hagler even though he was rarely in control. He stayed in through tough fights such as Leonard I and Barkley. Duran quit once, in 119 fights, but he showed real mental toughness in other bouts and throughout his 33 year career.

All of his attributes, mental and physical, are taken into account when people rate him. Quitting in the rematch with Leonard is held against him as it should be, but again, what Lightweight isn't going to get dominated by Hagler at 160 and Hearns at 154?

Duran was dominant at his best, and he had a lot of success past his prime and above his best weight against other great fighters. He had a remarkable career, and in it he proved not only was he of the highest class when it comes to ability, but he proved his durability, heart, chin, etc too. There were some real low-points, but he overcame them and fought on. He deserves criticism for quitting and even for becoming inconsistent once past his prime, but he deserves all of the accolades he gets as well because ultimately he proved himself in every way you want a GREAT fighter to. That is what the man was, one of the absolute Greatest fighters in the history of boxing.