Who's higher P4P: Ali or Duran?

Okay, but I can't see how you can argue that the HWs are the richest of all of the divisions. Comparing the top 10 LWs who ever lived with the top 10 HWs who ever lived is a no-contest.

If you don't like that, think about this. Louis and Ali were the best HWs ever... they strode above their divisions because they were able to incorporate skills of smaller men into their repertoire -Louis with his short and precide rapid fire combinations and Ali with his speed and mobility. They dominated because most HW couldn't compete with those skill sets.

---now that's just a thesis, but I think it holds.

Well, okay, I see that I have failed to convince you that Duran is greater than Ali. All the blood, sweat, tears, and tired fingers that this crusade has brought me is for naught.

It has been fun, though, Sweet Pea, and thanks.

 

:good

 

I'd rate Duran higher.

He was basically a lightweight, and certainly never seemed to have the frame to be a "legit" middleweight. Yet he beat a prime Sugar Ray Leonard at welterweight, and gave a prime Hagler a real tough fight at middleweight. He was basically looking unbeatable at lightweight when he decided to move up.
His success at higher weights was patchy, partly due to his age and bad training habits, partly due to the fact that he fought some outstanding bigger fighters. Duran's wins over relatively big and dangerous Davey Moore and Iran Barkley, both when he was supposedly finished, are amazing achievements.

Some people here are talking about Ali have superior "top wins" but how many of you rank George Foreman as a greater pound-for-pound fighter than Ray Leonard ?
People also tend to gloss over the fact that Ali's wins over Joe Frazier occured after Foreman had absolutely DESTROYED Frazier's reputation and status as one of boxing's best.
Liston's performances against Ali were a joke, he punked out before the fights got started - and while that's not Ali's fault, it has to be considered before pouring unlimited praise on Ali for the result.
On the other hand, Duran HIMSELF was the guilty party in a similarly farcical quit-job. So he loses points there.

I give Duran a lot of credit for his performance against Hagler, even though he lost. Hagler is another guy I'd rate higher pound-for-pound than ANYONE Ali fought.

Buchanan was no mediocre lightweight champion either.
And I think Duran betters Ali slightly in the longevity department too. He was beginning his run as lightweight king at age 21 and was registering one of his signature wins to put himself among the top 3 MIDDLEweights in the world at age 37/38.

Just my opinion but I think Duran should rank higher.

 

Not once did I mention actual competition at prime weight. If that were the basis then Duran would be at a distinct disadvantage because he was not as known and had to spend his best years fighting in a relatively small niche in his local Panama; it was only much later, perhaps after his prime, that his sail started to gather wind. Ali, meanwhile, was a veritable boxing superstar fighting all over Europe and Asia, and he was just lucky enough to be part of the golden era of heavyweight boxing.


I said Duran is the best lightweight, which would mean that he is above luminaries the likes of Whitaker, Williams, Armstrong, Gans, Ortiz & Leonard. Even if you place Sweet Pea higher (which would not be all too untenable), he would still be above a far superior class of men than Louis, Holmes, Lewis & Liston. No, he did not actually face these men in the ring, but I name them based on head-to-head ability. Duran is the best lightweight, Ali the best heavyweight head-to-head. This means they should be able to beat a good percentage of the people below them. Now, take a look at those lists again.

 

Not to mention Duran continued to register good, maybe even great wins into his late 40's, with no decade long break ala Geroge Foreman.

People also seem to forget that an extremely young Duran beat Marcel.

 

Well, if you phrase it in that way then yes I would agree with you. However, that was not the reality of Duran's career. I see where you are going with the open weight classification argument, but I can't as yet concur as I think it is more a testament to Marciano's greatness than it is to Ali's. Anyway, there is still the unaddressed principle of diminishing returns and how it was a factor for Ali. I mean it wouldn't have mattered much if it were Lennox Lewis up there in the ring with Muhammad.

 

Along the lines of what I was thinking.

Not too terribly hard to tell the difference between Ali beating Foster and Duran beating Barkley (While ancient)

 

How does Ali go up in weight p4p?

 

Yes, I'd definitely rate Hagler over Holmes, pound-for-pound.

 

I am a VERY big Ali fan.

Many would agree, but many wouldn't too.

Agreed, tho Ken and Esteban are top foes, among others, Roberto's comp at 135 is not in Ali's class at Heavyweight. Regardless it must be said he cut a swathe thru the ranks and beat all that was available basically, like a Foster, Hagler, Monzon, Hopkins etc.

Yeah H2H he'd have a lot of support for a number 1 position. I do think however he has more live underdogs against him than Ali, especially considering Ali defeated up to 3 top 10 ATG Heavyweight's.

Quite possibly now that you mention it. This however makes Ali stand out a bit more than Duran (at 135 at least) if you follow my thoughts.

Duran did unbelievable things over a huge period of time, but we also have to take on board the bad. If Duran was still good enough to crack such a tough nut as Barkley, what was he doing losing to many of the people he did. We can't say he no longer had it, because he kept proving us wrong. I'll grant that it is all but impossible to maintain intensity over such a marked period, but what i am pointing out is that he has some negatives as well as positives along the way.

You're probably right, but his defeats of Liston and Foreman are not far behind, and the sum of Ali's parts at the extreme top level is comfortably better, substancially really. We must remember Duran's defeat of Leonard is very badly soured by the rematch, and it was not fought much later at all. Ali by comparison came back later to twice avenge his grualling first bout with Frazier. For me Duran's manner of loss in the second fight takes quite a bit of gloss off his first fight dramatics - for me anyway. Ali has nothing of the likes of this disappointment staining his record.

To be honest i take no notice at all of what Roberto (and others at similar stages) did at and around the Camacho fight. Camacho was 11 years and 30 odd pounds removed from his peak and was certainly no longer the stylistic pain in the bum he may have been for Roberto at say 135. Camacho in reality was no great shakes anymore and hadn't been for many many years.

Yes, Duran's quite the sublime technician, no doubt at all. It is indeed incredible what he did at different stages up against different obstacles and handicaps.

Ali is lucky in that he had some unbelievable opposition where as many heavyweights had bugger all.

Perhaps where we differ is that i don't so much hold not being able to scale the weights against Heavyweights, i put a lot of value on the whole P4P thing in terms of class, opposition etc too. I don't see for example a Duran or Arguello automatically beyond reproach being above a Hagler, Holmes or Monzon for the sole reason they scaled more weights. Of course it helps a bit, but it's not the be all for me as it is for some others. At his absolute greatest i see Ali being at least every bit as good as Duran against all comers and i think he has him beat in pinnacle level wins.

Yeah, this is indeed where we differ, i don't so much hold this against him. Each to their own tho, many do, most probably. I think Ali vs his Heavyweight peers indeed compares to Duran vs all comers.

 

Agree with you 100%. You won't see a "Bum of the Month Club" in the lightweight division. When there's a good heavyweight fight what do commentators say afterwords? They fought like lightweights.

 

This is true.
In the 80s Duran lost to Leonard, Benitez, Laing, Hagler, Hearns and Sims.

In my opinion, he should never have lost to Laing, or Leonard, in the manner in which he did. Those fights were lost due to bad training habits, as perhaps were one or two of the others.
Duran was arrogant, liked beer and whores, liked to party, mix with his fans - drinking, gambling, and giving his money away. Too often the party animal.
He was unprepared for Hearns too.

But Hearns was a great fighter, as were Hagler, Benitez (another guy who had bad training habits) and Leonard.
Duran should have beaten Sims too, but Sims was a pretty good middleweight, probably a lot more natural strength than Duran. I cant remember the fight or how Duran looked, still it's a blemish.

Comparing to Ali - well, Ali was a bit of a slacker in training for some of those later years too. I think it is sheer "luck" that sees him without extra losses to Norton (which would make him 1-2 against Ken) and to Jimmy Young, on top of the loss to Leon Spinks.