Who was best p4p: RJJ and Duran?

I said Duran's career was a roller coaster ride after 1980. Which I'm sure you agree with. And thats not a knock on him, its praise more than anything. It shows that when he was down, New Orleans and Hearns, he could get himself together again. So while he wasn't consistent, another strong attribute shined many times; proving the doubters wrong.

I never said "longevity and "the ability to come back from setbacks" was all that sets him apart from Jones, but those are the ones that stick out. I did say previously that Duran has the best win out them both, Montreal. Dealing with adversity ties in with "the ability to come back from setbacks". Although adversity inside the ring throughout the course of a fight, Duran edges Jones as well.

Jones was able to dominate his opponents with more ease because he done things inside the ring which were harder to do than Duran, thats skill. As unique as Duran was as a fighter, Jones was was considerably more unique regarding how he went about his business IMO. Quality of oppostion is another obvious reason why Jones dominated his opponents. He never lost many rounds during his peak. But I said previously that his speed helped him so much and complimented his style very well. If Jones was had average handspeed, then he would never have been so consistent. He'd have been beaten sooner and more regularly.

Stonehands, I would say talent is something that a fighter is born with. Skill as well obviously, but it can be fine tuned and improved. Jones' style "wooooowed" observers, Duran's did as well. But you'll see fighters closer to Duran than Jones.

And Duran happens to be my favourite fighters of all-time. I'm just calling it as I see it. Not biased. Never am on here. Not biased on my take on Whitaker beating Duran either.

 

Do we think he was 25-30? Not sure if his resume is that strong

I think its debatable whether he was Linear champ or not too.

 

Just to be specific here Stonehands. His whole career was a "roller coaster ride" meaning it was great and had everything. A great lightweight reign, moving up weights, lonevity, and coming back from the dead. As a whole, I mean his career was eventful. I'm not meaning he was inconsitent from the offset, thus his whole career being up and down from start to finish.

And when I said after 1980 his career became more rocky. I meant he wasn't as consistent as he had been as he had aged and wasn't as prepared as he had been under Brown and Arcel.

People can interpret these things differently, so thought I'd be specific.

Robinson, Tyson, and Ali. All had roller coaster careers.

 

You wrote that Duran's career was a roller coaster ride that got especially rocky after 1980... which I found curious. Thanks for the clarification.

That's not skill.

"Jones was able to dominate his opponents with more ease" because he his opposition paled in comparison to Duran's -especially when you consider how far removed Duran was from his prime and his natural division.

And "the ability to do things inside the ring which were harder to do than Duran" is not necessarily skill. I'm not sure what you mean. Jumping out of harms way and then jumping back in with a wide left hook to finish off a Montell Griffin is an example of athleticism -not "skill". Jones's style is formed around power, speed, and reflexes -not skill. That level of talent is unusual, but it is not necessarily "harder to do". In fact, considering the typical Jones opponent, his natural talent, and his penchant for playing semi-pro basketball on the same day that he defended his title indicates ease, not difficulty. He'd have been a damn fool to try that if he was facing Hagler for instance.

Agreed... but that's talent, not skill.

Skill is not something a fighter is born with. Skill is taught. Skill takes devotion and discipline.

To be perfectly frank, I believe that the rise of Ali did much damage to the science of boxing. Human beings have the tendency to find shortcuts and sloth is easier than repeated drills and nuts and bolts. Ali, the hero to millions of aspiring boxers, seemed to demonstrate that you can discard the old rules in the ring and get away with it just by dancing, shuffling and having fun and a colossal ego. Most fighters are not blessed with the speed and natural timing and reflexes of an Ali or a Nunn or a Jones. Boxing is harder than that for 99% of men.

 

Very interesting that, for some reason i never put 2 and 2 together and though of this.

 

Let's forget the glory fights and the glory fighters and look at it plainly: The vast majority of boxing matches were a non-technically sound athlete squares off against a technician with average athleticism are foregone conclusions.

Generally speaking, technicians eat athletes. Boxing is hard. Speed and power and timing and reflexes aren't enough. Take a track and field star or a tennis champ or a shot putter or a wrestler and put him in the ring with a golden gloves boxer and you'll see the Grim Reaper climb into the ring by the end of the first round.

 

Oh definitely correct. The hardest game it is, the part i meant i'd never thought about efore was the point you made about Ali doing much damage to boxing because of his technical flaws combined with his idol status. Very interesting, and most likely you are right.

 

At first this seemed like a no-brainer, but the more I look at it, the more I want to say RJJ was the greater fighter on a P4P basis...

Certainly he was more consistent.

 

I'm losing it! LOSING IT!!!

 

Let's see your top ten ATG p4p list.

 

Fair enough!