why when mentioning the true greats of boxing does duran get talked about so highly

Since you obviously never seen him fight and you're probably about 17, it's time to put you on ignore, loser.

 

do I really sound 17? Give me a break. 17 year olds know nothing about that era. Duran is overrated. When someone says Duran is overrated they dont know his career? Who did he beat to show he was so great? Dejesus? Ask Cervantes about that then.

 

Duran had weight issues even at LW. There is no guarantee that he was he ever going to 'train properly and get the weight off the right way'.

You can't blame Leonard for that.

 

He was smaller than all of them. Think about that for a sec. And had 72 fights by the time he fought and beat Sugar Ray Leonard at Leonard's best weight.

 

Duran fought at 154 pounds in 1977 or so in tuneups. Fought higher than Leonard ever did. He was not that small a guy. The small issue came up when he lost to all the legends he fought. Never heard a word about it when he beat Moore or Barkley. Then it was just how great he was.

 

Moore and Barkley were not as good as the others but still bigger than Duran and good. Pretty simple. Hearns got KTFO by Barkley and lost the second fight to him. Duran was undersized and older and with a ton of fights under his belt and he managed to beat and take Barkley's best shots. Yes Hearns knocked Duran the hell out. Hearns also got KTFO in 3 by Hagler and KTFO by Leonard. Duran's fight vs Hagler was competitive and he didn't get blasted out despite being much smaller than Hearns. Hearns didn't beat Leonard either, Duran did.

 

So by saying Duran was so competitive with Barkley and Hagler, you are admitting Duran was legit at the weight. Thanks you. But this thread is still about Duran and not Hearns. Hearns gets knocked out and still knocks Duran out and Hearns also beat Benitez at Junior Middleweight when Duran was easily beaten. Hearns was going to knock out Barkley with bodypunches has he not become careless. But lets get back to Duran. Did he beat Hearns or Benitez? Hagler?. No.. Duran loses to Hagler and that is good? Hearns split Hagler's forehead open and staggered him. Duran had a sparing match with Hagler. Roldan knocked down Hagler and went 10. Hearns is not the issue here but he did beat Benitez and Duran and rocked Hagler. Duran lost to all of them. All the arguments for Duran never mentions the level he beat as a reason why he is great. :rofl.

 

i don't know how it got so bad over the years with duran. i mean seriously i agree with you on his lightweight reign as being very good to great even though he didn't fight or beat another atg at 135 he fought 2 hofers in buchannan and dejesus.

Duran lightweight- b+-A- (12 title defenses, 6 year title reign as 135 champ)
Duran welterweight - c+ ( no title defenses beat ray leoanrd, quit in the rematch)
Duran Junior Middleweight - C (1 title of davey moore, lost by ko to hearns)
Duran Middleweight - C ( won ttile of barkley no title defenses)

i have him around 40-50 where do you rank him?

 

20-30. Maybe high 20s. I think he is totally overrated on his accomplishments as a top all timer. His lightweight reign was good and I say yes. a B is a good grade, but after that he lost to the greats when having won would have guaranteed him top 10.. For sure.

 

if he had beaten ray in the rematch, went on to beat tommy hearns, and benitez, and finally beat hagler yeah he is def top 5 for sure. but to lose to all four in devastating fashion somehow makes you better then the other four that person is on something.

good to great lightweight everything else is woulda coulda shoulda.

 

exactly. but his fans want to say he is beat ever without great on his resume that he beat.

 

Duran was the greatest lightweight in boxing history.................

 

maybe prior to Pernell. Pernell would have won every round. Duran couldn't handle great fighters like Leonard,Hearns Benitez. He could handle Dejesus well. :rofl

 

I don't know...

Greatest LW ever. Everything else in addition to that is just cake.

I think he clearly ranks higher than Hagler, Hearns, and Leonard.

 

If everything is just cake after lightweight, that means his lightweight reign is a great reign? And it wasn't. Not enough great fighters. if we go by objective reasoning he cannot rank higher, but if we go by emotions and popularity I suppose he can. The criteria is who did he beat? Well Leonard and even Hearns beat greater guys than Duran did if you look at impact. What gets Duran high ranking? Beating Moore and Barkley? impossible? Losing to Hagler? Beating Ray but losing to him twice easily? Losing to Benitez and Hearns? If the reasoning is that his lightweight career makes him great and everything else is cake, well then yes he is great, but nothing better than top 30 pound for pound.