Seriously now.. People overrating Roberto duran

Duran is a great fighter no doubt, so is Chavez. I think comparison is like apples and oranges.

 

Picking Duran over the likes of Mayweather is hardly overrating the man. He'd be favored for sure.

You're overstating tremendously. Duran is very probably the greatest living fighter.

 

Duran would be fave to beat Mayweather in my eyes, most certainly.

 

Good post, I'm now in the 40-60-year-old group and I've always seen Duran as an all-time great but at the same time, I always thought he was a bit overrated. Some people want to put him on the Mount Rushmore of boxing. Hardly.

When get blow out and stopped early in one fight and quit in another fight without injury, then lose a few times on points your prime to fighters you should have beaten...

Duran's best stuff is at lightweight, but his competition at lightweight to me was average.


Mayweather's legend will grow as time passes. Undefeated with all of those wins over guys who will be in the hall of fame? What else can you say?

Excellent skills, durable, faster than 95% of the other fighters out there, with amazing balance, defense and a perfect counter. He's one tough guy to beat. You've got to outwork him and be willing to pay the price to have a chance.

Mayweather probably hits a little harder than most think. What other explanation is there for his opponents to respect him after getting hit cleanly?

 

Your an idiot that's all I've gotta say. Neither Duran or Chavez are overrated.

 

Legend or no, I suspect Mayweather's legacy will be as divisive as his active career was. Time passing does not always serve to be kind to a Boxer's standing and does not always tame the level of detraction.

How often do we see, on this forum alone, the greatness of past masters questioned; often (not always) with well-reasoned arguments? Mayweather's career carries significant question marks and time won't erase these.

 

In that fantasy scenario, I wonder at which stage in their respective careers you would have to choose, in order for this to be the case? The point being that they each had quite a different 'experience' and it would be difficult to compare them.

For example, Duran's time at lightweight alone records more bouts than Mayweather's entire career ledger. Just for the fact that Duran was almost twice as active as Mayweather, places him in a better position to be considered the Favorite, in my opinion. And, this is before we begin to consider their physical attributes; their respective styles; the difference in fan appeal; the differences in the level of opposition faced, etc etc.

 

This is very true. Mayweather's "0" comes with as many question marks as it has answers, and as with Marciano, there will always be people who build hypotheticals to erase it. He will certainly be seen in the pantheon of the greats, but when it comes to his specific spot on ATG lists and in H2H discussions, I think he'll be as hotly debated decades from now as he is today. People will recognize Mayweather's greatness, but will also question the heights of it compared to the top tier elite. In some ways, a loss can heighten a legacy, especially if it ends up avenged, or forcing a fighter to elevate themselves.

It's also tough for a defensive boxer like FMJ to gain the unquestioned adoration of the fans within his own time. He lacks the masterful ferocity of a Duran, the heightened drama of a Mancini, the gentlemanly power of Arguello. This, however, might be where he can gain some ground when we're a few decades out, and another fighter usurps his role as the sport's villain people want to cheer against.

 

Let's forget about others for a second, you, Unforgiven, are betting your house on one of these fighters to win while at their best. Who do YOU bet on?