You sound like a fool, and this is utterly ridiculous to read lol... Leonard was not inexperienced. Leonard was an olympian who was well schooled who beat a great fighter in Benitez. You sound young, and you don't know the circumstances, or the relevance of Duran or Leonard's wins or skills. Duran lost to Dejesus in his prime(who he beat two other times by ko) and Benitez and Hearns past his prime while PAc lost to Torrecampo, Singsurat, and Morales all during his prime. This is not a few critics saying Duran is top 5. Many critics believe universally that Duran is a top 5-10...ever in this sport!
Leonard was even more dominant, he beat Hagler despite being outweighed and inactive, and both Benitez and Hearns were undefeated. It's not quite the same thing here with Pacquiao, who beat Morales who was past it, and some people argue he never even beat Marquez. Duran is a top 5 ATG for a few reasons Scatterbrain. He dominated Lightweight, he was like 63-1 or something silly. That's two careers by todays standards, and then he moved up to Welterweight and beat prime Ray Leonard. Nobody else ever did, Ray has to be ranked the second best at that weight ever. Better than Hearns, Napoles, Trinidad, you name them. Likewise, Duran would then move up another division and absolutely decimate undefeated Davey Moore. Later on, moves up...to Middleweight and gives Hagler, one of the greatest ever at the weight, a tough fight and then outboxes, outpunches Iran Barkley, who was like a Light Heavyweight. Duran's win over Leonard is better than any win than virtually any other ever.
pac lost to torrecampo when he was what, 18 years old. :rofl pac lost to singsurat when he was what again, 20 years old. so pac is prime. nallege, hang yourself you dimwitted degenerate.
Duran would beat the living tar out of Pac at 135, 140 or 147. At 135, PAc won't treat Duran like he did Diaz I can tell you that lol... Duran beating Leonard for his title at 147, and I'm a fan of Leonard is one of the single greatest ring feats that I've ever seen in my life, and I was a kid seeing this with my dad.
of coarse how many hall of fame fighters a man fights and beats has to do with his greatness. Duran's lightweight reign was mediocre, and in those 7 years he fought about 11 times or so. He had some tuneup fights at 154. As for defenses and reigns,look at Virgil Hill at light heavy and cruiser. He had 25 defenses or so. Whether he had power or not, he still won his fights and he lost also, so how is Duran greater than Hill? It is all about Hall of fame fighters and how you beat in the boxing game. Fighting everyone is good. Hearns fought everyone also and most top fighters eventually do if they clamor is for the fights. If you win those fights is what will get you top 10 ATG. Beating Leonard in 1980 was an overrated win, in light of the fact he could not repeat it. And Moore was in 1983 when Duran was 32(on his birthday), and then Barkley at 38? Duran still lost to Hearns and Benitez and Hagler easily enough years before. My point is about Duran being top 10 ATG. The numbers are not there.
you are not answering the question and seeing things in proper perspective. if you keep on insisting that duran is top 5 atg. where does it put srl, hagler and hearns. and by implication, where does that put louis, robinson, ali, and the others? before or after duran. if duran is top 5, who will be your top 4?
No, Pac was knocked out both times by both guys while Duran was not ko'd until he was how old? Who ko'd Duran at 154...19 pounds above his prime fighting weight lol...!!!??? Did Duran lose when he was 18 and 20 years of age? He lost a 10 rounder to a future wrld champion who he ebat two other times BY ko. Who did Duran lose to in his prime? Dejesus and Leonard. Look at who Pac lost to in his prime. You're the @#!~#$$! degenerate lol... I got all excited when I saw your ridiculous answer, I typed all this shite out of order lol...
ridiculous? I am giving you facts. Something you guys never come up with. Leonard won his first title in November of 1979. He was on his 2nd title defense with Duran, who had 70 or more fights and was natural at the weight of 147. What proves Duran was a natural at the weight? -He fought as early as 1978 at 151 pounds in tuneups. He did not just move up and fight Ray and win. And then when he fights Ray and Ray fights his fight, he does not stop Ray to dominate. he should have if she was better. He had 72 fights and Ray had 26 or 27. Then Ray wins the rematch when he concentrates and boxes and uses lateral movement. I sound young? I am almost 45 years old and saw Duran for years and years when I was a kid with my dad. When you guys cannot bring up fans then you think you can degrade the person knowledge. I think if you brought up facts, that would maybe squelch my own facts. But by not bringing up anything, you are proving maybe you are the young one who does not know about boxing. I am giving you facts, and you are not giving anything to show me he is top 10. He fought many guys and was dominant at lightweight and the 1970's, but if you look at his opposition in hindsight, you do not see many great fighters there in the 1970s. He was great and he was better than all of them in the 70's, but when it came to becoming top 10 ATG, he did not beat the greats you need to to be there. Are you reading what this is about? It is about Duran not being worthy of top 10 ATG. He isn't. Worthy of top 30 or top 25? Yes. So you give Duran credit for beating Dejesus in rematches, but Leonard beating Duran in rematches does not apply? That is the Duran fan mentality. You can not selectively pick which Duran fights you want to accept as his legacy.
eat **** dickhead. don't take it back. you wanted to slip that one to make it appear pac lost to singsurat and torrecampo in his prime. pac lost to singsurat bec he was severely drained and had to shed it off. unlike the ***** fraud who chose to pay the fine instead. :rofl
The underlined is utterly ridiculous to read :yep:rofllol...and deserves no response. Along with the h.o.f's you beat, you also had to have beaten very good comp for critics to consider you a top 5-10 best ever.
I don't really care what the critics believe universally. I know what I see and I have followed boxing for 30 years to see the facts. The media and Duran made him out to be greater than he was. Yes he had machismo and he could demolish guys who stood in front of him, and most guys did stand in front of him. When he moved up he started fighting faster and better guys, which coincided with him moving up. So Duran fans just say he lost because he moved up. No one even seems to realize that his opposition went up also. And the public bought it. The non boxing public believes anything, and he was on television a lot in those years, so people saw him and he was exposed as a dominant fighter. Against Lampkin he was dominant. He was willing to fight and he was great. That does not make him ATG top 10. The numbers are not there.
