This proves Pac is better than Duran/Hearns/Leonard/Hagler

Titles should not be won at catchweights.

 

That combo was beautiful. Medina was no slouch either.

 

Duran got humiliated by Hearns, got humiliated by Leonard twice, got beat by Hagler, got beat by Benitez in the easiest fight of Benitez's life... exactly how is he the best out of them?

 

Some funny **** in this thread, keep up the comedy.

Greater than Duran, a dude who moved up and fought some of the best ever to campaign at 147 and 160...and no catch weight bull****. Come on now. His win over Iran Barkley alone is probably greater than anything on Manny Pacquiao's resume. A 38 year old former Lightweight nearing his 100th professional fight, shows tremendous skill, guts, and power to dethrone the Middleweight champion of the world who looked like a 175lbs fighter next to him. Then you have the single greatest win in Boxing history with Ray Leonard, and his stupendous reign at 135lbs.

...Come on now.

 

Beating Barkley is greater than anything Pacman has done? Iran Barkley lost to Sims and Kalambay and Nunn and Benn at middleweight. His win against Ray he couldn't stop an inexperienced fighter he had fighting his fight. People sure like to accentuate positives without looking at the other information. Duran is 1-5 (0) against Leonard,Hearns,Benitez,Hagler.

 

When you factor in the size of Duran, the size of Barkley, the age of Duran, and where he was at that point in time, I believe Duran's win over Barkley to be better than anything on Pacquiao's resume. Let Pacquiao fight the Middleweight champion of the world, even a weak holder like Felix Sturm, at the age of 38 nearing his 100th fight. Do you envision Pacquiao almost stopping Sturm, and outboxing him for long periods? It wouldn't happen.

Barkley was a good fighter, not a great one - but he was so much bigger than Duran, and entering his prime as a prizefighter, with Duran..ancient in Boxing years. That said, Barkley would take a lot of punishment against the former Lightweight champ, but his next fight with Nunn he gave the rising star, who was considered the best at 160lbs, all he could handle..one judge having it a draw. Barkley was a good fighter, if Duran was a fully fledged Middleweight, a 26 year old entering his peak as a fighter with 40-50 fighters under his belt, it'd only be a good win. But...Duran did something special that night as far as I'm concerned, one of the most complete performances I've ever witnessed.

The people who don't get Roberto Duran, are only factoring in how he campaigned against the fab four. Roberto was already a first ballot hall of famer before he even moved up to the 147lbs division, and despite all of the defeats he'd later endure, nothing can take away the victory over prime Ray. Inexperienced? He was experienced enough to have boxed the ears off Benitez, and destroy good competition in Green and Price. Let's face it, Ray was out-hussled, out-boxed, outfought by a former Lightweight. End of story.

 

Well Duran is clearly at a big physical disadvantage against the rest of the fab 4 as he started his career at light weight and really was only ever a big light welter at best. Yet he beat Leonard, gave Hagler a competitive fight and beat Barkley who had just bested Hearns for the WBC middleweight title.

While head to head he can't compare the rest of the fab 4 in terms of P4P he is as great if not greater than any of them. Can you imagine any light weight now going up and beating Pavlik? Them compare that to Mosley beating Pavlik and tell me which is the greater acheivement.

 

I think your logic is a little fuzzy. Pac's achievement was incredible last night and one of the greatest wins in the history of the sport, in a lot of our opinions. But winning titles in different weight classes is not some magical proof of being better than the legends you're mentioning.

 

If Pacquiao wanted to achieve the same feat as Duran, he'd have to fight on till he was 38 years of age and then take on the WBC Middleweight champion of the world up at 160lbs. It wouldn't happen. It wasn't like Duran was at 135lbs for a couple of fights till he filled out, he was a legitimate, certified 135lbs, racking up over 60 wins at the weight. It wasn't just his weight jumping that impresses, but the guys he fought. That's like Pacquiao fighting prime Oscar, Mosley, and Trinidad at 147lbs..even if none of those are better Welterweights than Duran's comp...that's about as close as it gets.

 

Ugh.. lets remember that its way easier to win belts today with like 10 belts a division then it was in the 80's

 

Boxing is a very subjective sport which makes it very difficult to quantify a fighters true worth. We have no definative proof that pac is better than them or that they are even as good as pac we simply take the information we have and attempt to evaluate a fighter ability based on his acheivements and performance.

Winning titles at multiple weights has become very popular, due to the proliferation of titles and weight classes. It has become so due to the initial trend set by the fab 4 themselves to do as such.

Pac cleary would not add to his legacy by staying at lightweight and fighting inferior opposition so has made the next logical step by going up in weight and beating better, bigger fighters. How else can a fighter expect to attain greatness than to push the boundaries of his own limits by taking on greater challenges.

While simply jumping up in weight proves little and adds little to ones legacy, jumping up in weight to fight better fighters does.

 

I wasn't talking about pac there I was commenting on how Duran deserves to rank above the rest of the fab 4.

 

Pac is still not in the league with Duran and quite a bit away from Leonard but I agree he is slightly ahead of Hagler and clearly ahead of Hearns.

 

Imo, Duran is very overrated, but hey I didn't live through his career..Imo, All-Time Pound for Pound lists should be based on head to head comparisons and accomplishments, aswell as talent..Duran achieved alot with an incredible lightweight reign and winning titles in four divisions from 135-160..and showed amazing longevity, boxing in 5 decades and still being competitive at an advanced age at the top level with some dramatic wins..and of course he has that great win in Montreal vs Leonard in their primes..however that was just one win..overall head to head vs his greatest opponents he fared very poorly..so how can you favor him over fighters who did manage to beat the best of their time?..If he wasn't everybody's hero I doubt he would be rated as high today..I can't put him ahead of SRL, Hagler and find it difficult to rate him even ahead of Hearns, who absolutely pulverized him..I think what Pac Man has done in his career definately puts him up with the accomplishments of the Fab 4..and it arguably surpasses what all of them have done..Pac fought through 10-11 divisions and won some sort of title in a record 7 of them, with some incredible wins against great fighters..he has an outstanding record vs his greatest opponents, legitimizing him as one of the ATG's..If it's that easy to win titles, why hasn't it been done before?..DLH needed a robbery to get his 6th division title..and PBF saw the risk involved as too great to even attempt to win his 6th..Fact is Pac's record will most probably not be broken for a very long time..What he has done has been extraordinary and should be treated as such..it's no stretch to compare him to or argue he is greater than any of the Fab 4..Heck, one more win could propel him into comparisons with SRR for the mantle of the GOAT

 

Well said :good