Is Roberto Duran overrated?

[PernellSweetPea]

Many people say Roberto Duran is in the top 3 greatest fighter list. Is Duran overrated????? The man beat one great fighter in his career and then lost to that fighter when he quit!!!! Is Duran overrated??????

[KO KIDD]

Great fighter great longetivity maybe overated on some people's lists but isnt that any fighter i think most have him placed properly

[Sweet Pea]

Only a simpleton would tell you so.

[MAG1965]

I am not going to get involved in this one. The Duran threads add my post count up quickly.

[Boxed Ears]

I'd say you can argue him anywhere from top ten to top 25 ATG. I'd say top three is too high. He's in my top ten. If you interpret his entire legacy based on his one win over Leonard, you are just very ignorant about him.

[BlackWater]

I have him at #8

[mr. magoo]

Claiming that Duran's resume is constructed of a win over " one great fighter ", does not even begin to do his legacy any justice.. He was arguably the greatest lightweight of all time, defeated many very good contenders and titlists, plus was competitive in multiple divisions and had longevity that was absolutely sick..

I do agree with some who say that he was a little overrated though... While his reign at lightweight was one of the most impressive in any weight division in history, having your best wins coming against Estaban Dejesus and Ken Buchanan wasn't as much so... They were certainly good fighters, but his great reign lacked great wins.... His ascent to the welterweight division, resulting in victories over Carlos palamino and the greatest win of his career against Ray Leonard, are what places him over the top...competing admirably against Marvin Hagler and beating Iran Barkley at an advanced age, were respectable feats as well, but not quite historic.... He also had a very bad loss to Thomas Hearns, and was beaten by such forgetables as Kirkland Laing and Robbie Simms...

All in all, he is probably worthy of being a top 10 pound for pound guy, but some have him anywhere from #1 to #5, and I think this is a tad over generous..

[laxpdx]

I have Duran in my top 3 of all-time, given his longevity and multiple titles in 5 different weight classes. Not to mention being the only LW in history to win the MW title.

Do I think he is overrated? In terms of greatness or in a P4P sense, no. In H2H fantasy matchups at 154 lbs and above, yes.

[Boxed Ears]

I have Duran in my top 3 of all-time, given his longevity and multiple titles in 5 different weight classes. Not to mention being the only LW in history to win the MW title.

Do I think he is overrated? In a P4P sense, no. In H2H fantasy matchups at 154 lbs and above, yes.

I keep hearing "the" middleweight title. But as great as the accomplishment was I think we should be careful to say "a" middleweight title. Otherwise, you could throw ODLH on the heap too.

[Unforgiven]

He was one of the greatest lightweights of all-time. He defended the title 12 times over a six year period and look scintillating in those fights. Then he went up to welterweight and looked great beating Ray Leonard for the title, a shot he earned with a very impressive victory over former champion Carlos Palomino.

The rest of his career, from the disgraceful quit job in the Leonard rematch onwards, is not particularly good. The Barkley fight in 1989 was one last miraculous comeback, but the vast weight of Duran's greatness lies in the 1970s and no later than 1980.

[PowerPuncher]

On here he is both underrated and overrated. He is better than Henry Armstrong as a fighter throughout their respective weight classes, but Armstrong gets major wank time. However he isnt clearly better than Leonard, thats where the major overrating comes from.

And he gets more excuses for losses than any fighters in history, whenever he loses to a great fighter whos a bad style, its 'I had to lose loads of weight, I was weight drained, but Im also small at the weight'

And apparently he only trains hard for C class opponents but never for the great 1s he faces, he just drinks beer and eat tacos and takes diuretics against the greats, obviously he would have kicked their ass if he trained

And whats worse is its not just the nuthuggers who lap it up

[Pachilles]

His greatness rests on excusing all 16 of his losses. Which Robertards are fluent in. Or some just flat out refuse to believe his career went on beyond Montreal. You see, how he lost is irrelevant, why he lost only adds to his greatness!

He is without a doubt the biggest bitch in the history of boxing and is the king of excuses.
His victories don't recieve the same double standards. His greatest wins are...

Ray Leonard - Fantastic win, made his career, from the hate people had for Leonard.
Carlos Palomino - Was at the very tail end of his career, infact it was his very last serious fight. He was merely a faded big name used to boost the reputations of hot WW contenders Benitez and Duran.
Iran Barkley - Absolutely in no way, shape or form ATG career defining competition
Davey Moore - Absolutely in no way, shape or form career defining competition
Ken Buchanan - Finished the fight with literally an almighty punch to the testicles, anyone else else would've been disqualified.
De Jesus - Went 2 - 1 with him. His very best wins at LW.

Now all you have to do is hype the above fighters up beyond measure(except for Leonard because he made Duran quit like a bitch in the rematch and beat him in the 3rd fight...just pretend they never happened). Hype these fighters up to delusional standards, and then make as many excuses you can for the following losses....

-De Jesus, Leonard, Benitez, Laing, Hagler, Hearns, Sims, Leonard, Lawlor, Pazienzax2, Camacho, Castro, Joppy, Gonzales, Camacho

...and then you have credibility on ESB Classic.

[Unforgiven]

He might squeak into the top 20.

Actually, he wouldn't.

He'd definitely make my top 10 lightweights of all-time though. Perhaps top 5.

[PernellSweetPea]

His greatness rests on excusing all 16 of his losses. Which Robertards are fluent in. Or some just flat out refuse to believe his career went on beyond Montreal. You see, how he lost is irrelevant, why he lost only adds to his greatness!

He is without a doubt the biggest bitch in the history of boxing and is the king of excuses.
His victories don't recieve the same double standards. His greatest wins are...

Ray Leonard - Fantastic win, made his career, from the hate people had for Leonard.
Carlos Palomino - Was at the very tail end of his career, infact it was his very last serious fight. He was merely a faded big name used to boost the reputations of hot WW contenders Benitez and Duran.
Iran Barkley - Absolutely in no way, shape or form ATG career defining competition
Davey Moore - Absolutely in no way, shape or form career defining competition
Ken Buchanan - Finished the fight with literally an almighty punch to the testicles, anyone else else would've been disqualified.
De Jesus - Went 2 - 1 with him. His very best wins at LW.

Now all you have to do is hype the above fighters up beyond measure(except for Leonard because he made Duran quit like a bitch in the rematch and beat him in the 3rd fight...just pretend they never happened). Hype these fighters up to delusional standards, and then make as many excuses you can for the following losses....

-De Jesus, Leonard, Benitez, Laing, Hagler, Hearns, Sims, Leonard, Lawlor, Pazienzax2, Camacho, Castro, Joppy, Gonzales, Camacho

...and then you have credibility on ESB Classic.exactly!!!!!!:good:good:good:good:happy:happy:happy:hammertime:clap::mjCouldn't have said it better myself. Right on!!!

[bodhi]

If somebody says he is Top3, he is overrating him. If somebody says he is Top20 he is underrating him. He should be Top10, perhaps Top15.

[Unforgiven]

Pachilles,
Surely by the time he gets to like 40 or whatever, it would be acceptable to excuse some of his losses ?

[CassiusClayAli]

His greatness rests on excusing all 16 of his losses. Which Robertards are fluent in. Or some just flat out refuse to believe his career went on beyond Montreal. You see, how he lost is irrelevant, why he lost only adds to his greatness!

He is without a doubt the biggest bitch in the history of boxing and is the king of excuses.
His victories don't recieve the same double standards. His greatest wins are...

Ray Leonard - Fantastic win, made his career, from the hate people had for Leonard.
Carlos Palomino - Was at the very tail end of his career, infact it was his very last serious fight. He was merely a faded big name used to boost the reputations of hot WW contenders Benitez and Duran.
Iran Barkley - Absolutely in no way, shape or form ATG career defining competition
Davey Moore - Absolutely in no way, shape or form career defining competition
Ken Buchanan - Finished the fight with literally an almighty punch to the testicles, anyone else else would've been disqualified.
De Jesus - Went 2 - 1 with him. His very best wins at LW.

Now all you have to do is hype the above fighters up beyond measure(except for Leonard because he made Duran quit like a bitch in the rematch and beat him in the 3rd fight...just pretend they never happened). Hype these fighters up to delusional standards, and then make as many excuses you can for the following losses....

-De Jesus, Leonard, Benitez, Laing, Hagler, Hearns, Sims, Leonard, Lawlor, Pazienzax2, Camacho, Castro, Joppy, Gonzales, Camacho

...and then you have credibility on ESB Classic.This is a cool comment!. Yes Duran overrated big and only 2 hall of fame wins in his boxing record on boxrec!. For an ATG that is terrible!!!!! and he quit with SRL!!!:verysad

[Pachilles]

Pachilles,
Surely by the time he gets to like 40 or whatever, it would be acceptable to excuse some of his losses ?

I am consistant with every single boxer i talk about in saying that a loss is a loss. Its not fair to make excuses and claim something totally different would've happened, compared to what actually did happen. If a fighter steps into the ring and he hadn't trained properly for the fight, that is his fault! It is a weakness to enter the ring unprepared, an emotional and a mental weakness. If a fighter is "past his prime" and still enters the ring it is a weaknessunder the same principle.

[Pachilles]

This is a cool comment!. Yes Duran overrated big and only 2 hall of fame wins in his boxing record on boxrec!. For an ATG that is terrible!!!!! and he quit with SRL!!!:verysad

And now the Robertards are going to the trouble of creating new accounts, and typing like idiots to discredit the image of us non-believers.

[Unforgiven]

If somebody says he is Top3, he is overrating him. If somebody says he is Top20 he is underrating him. He should be Top10, perhaps Top15.

If you are talking ALL-TIME POUND-FOR-POUND, I disagree.
On consideration, he wouldn't get in my top 20 all-time p4p.
I mean, we're talking about all-time, every fighter who ever fought.

If you mean lightweights, I'd say he'd definitely make the top 10, perhaps top 5.

[bodhi]

If you are talking ALL-TIME POUND-FOR-POUND, I disagree.
On consideration, he wouldn't get in my top 20 all-time p4p.
I mean, we're talking about all-time, every fighter who ever fought.

If you mean lightweights, I'd say he'd definitely make the top 10, perhaps top 5.

You can disagree with it. It just means you are underrating him.

[Unforgiven]

I am consistant with every single boxer i talk about in saying that a loss is a loss. Its not fair to make excuses and claim something totally different would've happened, compared to what actually did happen. If a fighter steps into the ring and he hadn't trained properly for the fight, that is his fault! It is a weakness to enter the ring unprepared, an emotional and a mental weakness. If a fighter is "past his prime" and still enters the ring it is a weaknessunder the same principle.

Ok. That's your criteria.
:good

[Unforgiven]

You can disagree with it. It just means you are underrating him.

No, because everyone I'd rate above him would be thoroughly deserving. Great great fighters. :good

[Pachilles]

Ok. That's your criteria.
:good

Its not criteria mate, its fact. If somebody takes those fights and wins then fine, use it. But if he loses, it cannot be excused or turned into some kind of victory

[bodhi]

Its not criteria mate, its fact. If somebody takes those fights and wins then fine, use it. But if he loses, it cannot be excused or turned into some kind of victory

No, it's not fact. It's your opinion. If people have the opinion that past prime losses are excusable it's as much "fact" as your "facts".

[Pachilles]

No, it's not fact. It's your opinion. If people have the opinion that past prime losses are excusable it's as much "fact" as your "facts".

Regardless, its still a loss. A loss is a loss. If you lost, you lost for a fact. It is a fact that you lost. There can be reasons behind a loss, reasons to why you lost...but a reasonable loss doesnt make a win.. An excuse doesnt excuse a loss, its still a loss. You can pretend it never happened, thats all you can do. But in real life it did happen, it is a loss no matter what. And that is why me saying a loss is a loss is FACT.

[Meast]

I voted yes as I don't think he belongs in the top 3.

top 10 without a question, but top 3 is too high imo.

[bodhi]

Regardless, its still a loss. A loss is a loss. If you lost, you lost for a fact. It is a fact that you lost. There can be reasons behind a loss, reasons to why you lost...but a reasonable loss doesnt make a win.. An excuse doesnt excuse a loss, its still a loss. You can pretend it never happened, thats all you can do. But in real life it did happen, it is a loss no matter what. And that is why me saying a loss is a loss is FACT.

Yes, a loss is a loss. But not all losses are the same.

[JudgeDredd]

Absolutely not! At least top 3 Lightweight of all time, even without the Leonard win he's right up there.

[Ezzard]

He was the best fighter of the colour TV age.

Watch him fight, glance at his record, there are enough names on there to back up what you’ve watched. Factor in his longevity… He’s as good as it gets. Some fighters achieved more in the past but I doubt anyone in the future will trump him.

[Flea Man]

Claiming that Duran's resume is constructed of a win over " one great fighter ", does not even begin to do his legacy any justice.. He was arguably the greatest lightweight of all time, defeated many very good contenders and titlists, plus was competitive in multiple divisions and had longevity that was absolutely sick..

I do agree with some who say that he was a little overrated though... While his reign at lightweight was one of the most impressive in any weight division in history, having your best wins coming against Estaban Dejesus and Ken Buchanan wasn't as much so... They were certainly good fighters, but his great reign lacked great wins.... His ascent to the welterweight division, resulting in victories over Carlos palamino and the greatest win of his career against Ray Leonard, are what places him over the top...competing admirably against Marvin Hagler and beating Iran Barkley at an advanced age, were respectable feats as well, but not quite historic.... He also had a very bad loss to Thomas Hearns, and was beaten by such forgetables as Kirkland Laing and Robbie Simms...

All in all, he is probably worthy of being a top 10 pound for pound guy, but some have him anywhere from #1 to #5, and I think this is a tad over generous..

As always, well thought out post.

I have Duran at no.6.

But to the thread starter, who thinks it was all based on one win....I mean, come on:patsch

[Flea Man]

I'd also like to know why the poll isn't public?

[mr. magoo]

As always, well thought out post.

I have Duran at no.6.

But to the thread starter, who thinks it was all based on one win....I mean, come on:patsch


Thanks,

While Duran's win over Sugar Ray, is most certainly the brightest jewel in his crown, his resume has far, far more depth than just the claim to a single great victory...

[essexboy]

It all depends whos rating him doesnt it? Top ten is reasonable but top three sounds excessive.

[Addie]

By Pachilles? No.

[Pachilles]

By Pachilles? No.

I have him 14-18 All time P4P on my pro-footage P4P list. Is that so underrated?

My problem is that in my mind Leonard, Hearns and Hagler are most certainly above him. And that Montreal Duran isn't KOing Prime Ali, Tyson, Lewis, Marciano, Holyfield, Jones Jr.

[Addie]

I have him 14-18 All time P4P on my pro-footage P4P list. Is that so underrated?

My problem is that in my mind Leonard, Hearns and Hagler are most certainly above him. And that Montreal Duran isn't KOing Prime Ali, Tyson, Lewis, Marciano, Holyfield, Jones Jr.

:lol:

[Meast]

And that Montreal Duran isn't KOing Prime Ali, Tyson, Lewis, Marciano, Holyfield, Jones Jr.


What's that suppost to mean :lol:

[Pachilles]

What's that suppost to mean :lol:

It means i'm in the minority

Exaggerations aside though i made a joke post awhile ago asking if Montreal Duran would defeat prime Ali, Tyso and Lewis. And if you look through all the sarcastic respones, there are infact several posters that do give Duran a chance. Anarci being one of them.

[ChrisPontius]

Many here have him in the top5 p4p. I think that's overrating him severely. Top10 is also questionable, although i'm the first to admit that my knowledge on great fighters below 160 and before 1940 is lacking.

What annoys me most though, is the fact that he (and/or his supporters) got an excuse for every single loss. The Holyfield/Toney syndrome.

[Pachilles]

What annoys me most though, is the fact that he (and/or his supporters) got an excuse for every single loss. The Holyfield/Toney syndrome.

Yeah ill tell ya something, i think you'll understand!
When i, say that something, i wanna hold your haaaand!
I WANNA HOLD YOUR HAND!
I WANNA HOLD YOUR HAND!

[Briscoe]

Many people say Roberto Duran is in the top 3 greatest fighter list. Is Duran overrated????? The man beat one great fighter in his career and then lost to that fighter when he quit!!!! Is Duran overrated??????


Your punctuation is absurd. Your statement, "The man beat one great fighter in his career and then lost to that fighter when he quit" ignores his lightweight campaign. That draws the theory that you assume Sugar Ray to be the best point of his career. It's a good place, he did beat him the first time around. Not the entire point though. You're ignoring way too much information based on the way you opened this thread. I'd hope you have more to talk about then this.

[Unforgiven]

What annoys me most though, is the fact that he (and/or his supporters) got an excuse for every single loss. The Holyfield/Toney syndrome.

Holyfield/Toney ??

[duranimal]

I'd also like to know why the poll isn't public?

Pure FEAR:yep & shit scared of getting some of this:vonnecunt:blackeye

[Pachilles]

Pure FEAR:yep & shit scared of getting some of this:vonnecunt:blackeye

no mas! no mas! please senor leonard! no mas!

[Sweet Pea]

Ray Robinson is overrated as well, I guess. He did have 19 losses, after all. That's 3 more than Duran. Therefore Duran>Robinson.

[essexboy]

I have him 14-18 All time P4P on my pro-footage P4P list. Is that so underrated?

My problem is that in my mind Leonard, Hearns and Hagler are most certainly above him. And that Montreal Duran isn't KOing Prime Ali, Tyson, Lewis, Marciano, Holyfield, Jones Jr.

Thats sounds fair but whats your reasoning for having Hagler above Duran? I cant see it. Hagler's reign at middleweight is comparable to Duran's reign at lightweight. If Hagler had gone on to win titles in other weight divisions like Duran did, I would understand but he didnt. Im interested to hear how you come to that conclusion.

[ChrisPontius]

Holyfield/Toney ??

You are right, Duran preceded them, so the syndrome should be named after him.

[Unforgiven]

You are right, Duran preceded them, so the syndrome should be named after him.

I didn't know there was a syndrome. :lol:
What does it consist of again ?

[Stevie G]

In my view Duran is quite justifiably rated very high on all-time great lists.

[ChrisPontius]

I didn't know there was a syndrome. :lol:
What does it consist of again ?

Being undefeated because every single loss is neutralized by an excuse.

Some examples:

De Jesus: Duran was green
Leonard: Duran had no time to prepare, this is Leonard's fault because he wanted a rematch. Oh, and he had stomach cramps
Hagler: Duran was old, judges saw it wrong
Laing: Duran was unmotivated, couldn't be bothered to win
Benetiz: Duran didn't care nor trained for this fight
Hearns: Last two combined

etc etc

[bodhi]

Being undefeated because every single loss is neutralized by an excuse.

Some examples:

De Jesus: Duran was green
Leonard: Duran had no time to prepare, this is Leonard's fault because he wanted a rematch. Oh, and he had stomach cramps
Hagler: Duran was old, judges saw it wrong
Laing: Duran was unmotivated, couldn't be bothered to win
Benetiz: Duran didn't care nor trained for this fight
Hearns: Last two combined

etc etc

That's actually the only one that I think holds some weight.

[Sweet Pea]

Duran was still a bit green for the DeJesus fight. I don't see how that's arguable. Be that as it may, I don't think that was the primary reason. The fact that he was in with an excellent fighter putting in one of his best performances in a 10 round non-title bout that didn't see Duran at his fiery best, is the main reason. I wouldn't say that was the case if I didn't see it in the footage.

That's why I don't make the same excuse for the Benitez fight. Duran simply wasn't the same fighter at that weight and at that stage as he was earlier in his career, especially against a stylist like Benitez. Do I think the fight would've been different a few years earlier at Welter? Yes, but at 154, at that stage of his career and beyond, Duran is likely always losing that fight. He actually seemed in better shape physically for that one than most of his other fights around that time.

Somewhat similar with Hearns. Duran didn't have much of a strategy for that one it didn't appear, not to mention Hearns at the weight was stylistic kryptonite for the bloated, out of shape Duran. Again, if you refuse to acknowledge this from the footage I'd hardly say I'm the one with an irrational bias. Hearns may've always beaten Duran, regardless. Not entirely sure, but I don't think it's too damning for him in the long run, being a bloated Lightweight losing to one of the most dynamic 147-154 pounders of all time who holds every conceivable advantage. Especially seeing as how he was still able to bounce back from it in his advanced age.

The fire that fueled Duran throughout his first 13 years was only seen in spurts once he'd reach the apex of his career after the first Leonard fight. That's the primary reason we saw such a drop-off, that and the fact that he had indeed been fighting wars for 13 years, and was fighting multiple classes above his best weight. I don't see why that's so difficult to comprehend. His achievements past that point only add to his legacy, and really put into context his technical abilities when he was on occasion able to muster up that same fire that he once had. I'm not saying he'd have fared any better against the likes of Hagler or Benitez regardless, but Laing and Simms? Surely, even at that stage of his career. Should those losses be held against him? Yeah, to some degree, but I don't think they hold any merit as far as showing what limits Duran had as a fighter at his best.

Duran was a passion fighter, as I've said many times. His performance relied on his passion. Past a certain point in a fighter's career it's difficult to muster up that same burning fuel time and again, especially when said fighter has deteriorated physically to the point Duran had in his later years. All in all, he had one of the most successful and impressive careers of all time, and at his best was second to few (arguably none).

[Unforgiven]

Being undefeated because every single loss is neutralized by an excuse.

Some examples:

De Jesus: Duran was green
Leonard: Duran had no time to prepare, this is Leonard's fault because he wanted a rematch. Oh, and he had stomach cramps
Hagler: Duran was old, judges saw it wrong
Laing: Duran was unmotivated, couldn't be bothered to win
Benetiz: Duran didn't care nor trained for this fight
Hearns: Last two combined

etc etc

Yeah, I get ya. I didn't know Holyfield and Toney got special treatment though. Of course, Holyfield is given leeway because the vast majority of his losses were past-prime. Same is true of Ali.

[Unforgiven]

I've never dimissed the stomach cramps excuse as a lie. It could well be true. Fighters are human beings after all.

[lora]

Some of you guys won't be happy until it's been resolved that Duran had a 25 year prime that spanned every weightclass from lightweight to light heavy.

If you ask me it's the constant tedious Leonard and Duran discussion and joke threads over the same tired old topics that's overrated on this forum.almost impossible to get a decent discussion going now on either fighter without the biased agenda driven element coming in and blindly taking sides.Bunch of unskilled labourers:wink:.

[enquirer]

Like that post a lot sweet pea. Excellent points.

[itrymariti]

Sweet Pea summed it up. Basically, the long and the short of the issue is tape. Duran just did not look as good in some of his fights as he did in others, whether it was motivation, weight, pre-prime-ness, past-prime-ness - whatever. No-one's trying to wipe away his losses, but facts are facts.

[Meast]

Duran was still a bit green for the DeJesus fight. I don't see how that's arguable. Be that as it may, I don't think that was the primary reason. The fact that he was in with an excellent fighter putting in one of his best performances in a 10 round non-title bout that didn't see Duran at his fiery best, is the main reason. I wouldn't say that was the case if I didn't see it in the footage.

That's why I don't make the same excuse for the Benitez fight. Duran simply wasn't the same fighter at that weight and at that stage as he was earlier in his career, especially against a stylist like Benitez. Do I think the fight would've been different a few years earlier at Welter? Yes, but at 154, at that stage of his career and beyond, Duran is likely always losing that fight. He actually seemed in better shape physically for that one than most of his other fights around that time.

Somewhat similar with Hearns. Duran didn't have much of a strategy for that one it didn't appear, not to mention Hearns at the weight was stylistic kryptonite for the bloated, out of shape Duran. Again, if you refuse to acknowledge this from the footage I'd hardly say I'm the one with an irrational bias. Hearns may've always beaten Duran, regardless. Not entirely sure, but I don't think it's too damning for him in the long run, being a bloated Lightweight losing to one of the most dynamic 147-154 pounders of all time who holds every conceivable advantage. Especially seeing as how he was still able to bounce back from it in his advanced age.

The fire that fueled Duran throughout his first 13 years was only seen in spurts once he'd reach the apex of his career after the first Leonard fight. That's the primary reason we saw such a drop-off, that and the fact that he had indeed been fighting wars for 13 years, and was fighting multiple classes above his best weight. I don't see why that's so difficult to comprehend. His achievements past that point only add to his legacy, and really put into context his technical abilities when he was on occasion able to muster up that same fire that he once had. I'm not saying he'd have fared any better against the likes of Hagler or Benitez regardless, but Laing and Simms? Surely, even at that stage of his career. Should those losses be held against him? Yeah, to some degree, but I don't think they hold any merit as far as showing what limits Duran had as a fighter at his best.

Duran was a passion fighter, as I've said many times. His performance relied on his passion. Past a certain point in a fighter's career it's difficult to muster up that same burning fuel time and again, especially when said fighter has deteriorated physically to the point Duran had in his later years. All in all, he had one of the most successful and impressive careers of all time, and at his best was second to few (arguably none).

Excellent post, you summed it up

[Pachilles]

Sweet Pea summed it up. Basically, the long and the short of the issue is tape. Duran just did not look as good in some of his fights as he did in others, whether it was motivation, weight, pre-prime-ness, past-prime-ness - whatever. No-one's trying to wipe away his losses, but facts are facts.

Or whether it was his fucking opponent getting the better of him maybe? No because its Duran we're talking about, it was motivation, weight, pre-prime-ness, past-prime-ness, stomach cramp. Do you see my point??? How can you not see my fucking point???

[Titan1]

Top Ten, yes, but not top three.

[TheGreatA]

I don't think anyone has any trouble admitting that Leonard was better than Duran at 147 all-time, Hearns and Benitez were better than Duran at 154 all-time and that Hagler was better than Duran at 160 all-time.

[ChrisPontius]

Yeah, I get ya. I didn't know Holyfield and Toney got special treatment though. Of course, Holyfield is given leeway because the vast majority of his losses were past-prime. Same is true of Ali.

Holyfield may have been a wrong example. Although he has some excuses for his losses, the value his legacy is not being exxagerated.

When a sentence involves Toney, on the other hand, it is always followed by "if he was in shape", "if he was motivated", "if he didn't use steroids", etc etc. Many seem to forget that even his best fights, for instance Nunn and Jirov, the fights were very close on the scorecards going into the 12th... not to mention losses to lesser fighters (Thadzi) and a few gift/close decisions here and there (McCallum, Tiberi, Rahman, Griffin)..

[ripcity]

In terms of ability/talent/skills and acomplishment. He is in or very near the top 10 Pound for pound. As far as head to head match ups goes he can be outboxed. At lightweight where so many of you "knlodgable" clasic posters fawn over him at. I would fell comfortable and safe betting on Benny Leonard, Pernell Whatiker, Ike Williams, Joe Gans and Floyd Mayweather over him. 10 out of 10 times. The only reason he beat Ray leonard is because Leonard fought Duran's fight. Leonard domanated the rematch, making Duran quit. If you argue that Duran was not propeerly trained. Whose fault was that. Even if he was he might not have quit but he was not going to win that fight or any fight with a better and more skilled boxer.

[Bill Butcher]

Cant answer the thread question because it depends on who`s doing the rating... no1 is overrating him... no15 is underrating him.... I have him at about no5.

[Son of Gaul]

I honestly think he is UNDERRATED at LW as many people see him losing classic matchups to fringe top 10ers when he was nearly unbeatable at this weight.

[Sweet Pea]

The Classic Forum has basically become like the General Forum for old school discussion.

[Flea Man]

The Classic Forum has basically become like the General Forum for old school discussion.

There seem to be a lot of unobjective posters claiming objective posters are biased. Odd and frustrating.

[JMP]

In terms of ability/talent/skills and acomplishment. He is in or very near the top 10 Pound for pound. As far as head to head match ups goes he can be outboxed. At lightweight where so many of you "knlodgable" clasic posters fawn over him at. I would fell comfortable and safe betting on Benny Leonard, Pernell Whatiker, Ike Williams, Joe Gans and Floyd Mayweather over him. 10 out of 10 times. The only reason he beat Ray leonard is because Leonard fought Duran's fight. Leonard domanated the rematch, making Duran quit. If you argue that Duran was not propeerly trained. Whose fault was that. Even if he was he might not have quit but he was not going to win that fight or any fight with a better and more skilled boxer.

Mayweather beating Duran 10 out of 10? Good one. He barely beat Castillo and didn't exactly dominate him the second time around. Most of this stuff you wrote has been argued against by the most "knlodgable" posters, yet so many continue to spew this garbage. Frustrating, I tell ya.

[MRBILL]

I just did a quick thread in the General Forum that barely anybody gives a fuck about in regards to Eddie M. Muhammad's "Porky" look at 175 pounds. And, I also think the same can be said about Roberto Duran when he fights at Middleweight or Super-Middleweight..... Anything above 154 pounds and Duran shows / displays a certain amount of pork in the strike-zone area of his body.

I just taped Eddie M. Muhammad's wicked 1982 fourth round KO over Lottie Mwale off ESPN the other night, and while Muhammad made 175 pounds, he still had some soft spots in his girth and lower back....

MR.BILL

[Seamus]

Has anyone here ever seen his fights from 72 to 78? Or are we just going to disregard his prime and judge him on the way down?

[teeto]

There seem to be a lot of unobjective posters claiming objective posters are biased. Odd and frustrating.
That's exactly what it is. Pachilles is obviously insecure about his Duran love conspiracy theory because he feels the need to state its so called existence in every one of his posts.

I tell him every time, and explain it to him every time, to which he usually replies he hasn't seen much of lightweight Duran, or any Buchanan. So i'm not doing it this time, me, you, Sweet Pea etc have made it consistently clear, so let us ignore them consistently now. This forum has always been the god section, i don't want that to stop. Let's ignore trolling now lads.

[kidargentine]

I'm not that big on him, but you've got be crazy to call that guy Overrated...

[lora]

Jesus, no one who hasn't even bothered to watch much of his lightweight fights should be holding much of an opinion either way on Duran.Talk about lacking credibility.

IF you are going to p[ost time and time again, especially if it's laying into a fighter, at least watch the damn fights.

[werety]

In terms of ability/talent/skills and acomplishment. He is in or very near the top 10 Pound for pound. As far as head to head match ups goes he can be outboxed. At lightweight where so many of you "knlodgable" clasic posters fawn over him at. I would fell comfortable and safe betting on Benny Leonard, Pernell Whatiker, Ike Williams, Joe Gans and Floyd Mayweather over him. 10 out of 10 times. The only reason he beat Ray leonard is because Leonard fought Duran's fight. Leonard domanated the rematch, making Duran quit. If you argue that Duran was not propeerly trained. Whose fault was that. Even if he was he might not have quit but he was not going to win that fight or any fight with a better and more skilled boxer.

So Ken Buchanan wasn't a skilled boxer/mover at lightweight?

[ripcity]

Mayweather beating Duran 10 out of 10? Good one. He barely beat Castillo and didn't exactly dominate him the second time around. Most of this stuff you wrote has been argued against by the most "knlodgable" posters, yet so many continue to spew this garbage. Frustrating, I tell ya.
One bad night and Mayweather at is best is not that good? Is that how it works? Duran quit against Ray Leonard this means he would quit under any adverse sittuition. That is the logic you are using. I personaly think your wrong, but what do I know?

[ripcity]

So Ken Buchanan wasn't a skilled boxer/mover at lightweight?
I'd like to see anyone surive that low blow after the bell. Duran should have been DQ'd.

[Sardu]

He was the best fighter of the 1970's so he is not overated IMO. But his resume, although great, does not compare to men like Sugar Ray Robinson, Willie Pep or Henry Armstrong in terms of quality of opposition in prime. Duran beat all the opponents he needed to beat at his best - 1972 to 1980. He was perhaps the best lightweight ever.

[My2Sense]

Many people say Roberto Duran is in the top 3 greatest fighter list. Is Duran overrated?????

By those people, yes.

By anyone outside of them, no.

The man beat one great fighter in his career...

Yes, if DNA scientists somehow manage to combine Ray Leonard, Ken Buchanan, Esteban DeJesus, Ernesto Marcel, and Carlos Palomino into a single fighter.

Is Duran overrated??????

We heard you the first time.

[CassiusClayAli]

By those people, yes.

By anyone outside of them, no.



Yes, if DNA scientists somehow manage to combine Ray Leonard, Ken Buchanan, Esteban DeJesus, Ernesto Marcel, and Carlos Palomino into a single fighter.no matter how you say it the only great in that list is Sugar Ray. Dejesus isn't even in the top 20 of lightweights and Palomino the same at welt. :mj

[Boxed Ears]

no matter how you say it the only great in that list is Sugar Ray. Dejesus isn't even in the top 20 of lightweights and Palomino the same at welt. :mj
Palomino is a HOF'er because people liked the mustache and Buchanan is a HOF'er because people felt sorry about the groin punch. You're right, Dejesus isn't great if he doesn't make a top twenty list of one of the deepest, richest, oldest divisions in the sport, yadda, yadda, yadda, yadda. Duran clearly got lucky with Leonard the first time around and it's his only credible win over a great opponent. And Leonard was green anyway. And, um, the sun was in his eyes, and Duran cheated by being mean before the fight. And, and, and, and...everybody else he fought was a cab driver! Even the world champions!

[Addie]

Well you say Leonard is the only great Duran beat, but I think his win over Barkley is actually one of the better wins among the fab four.

[My2Sense]

Dejesus isn't even in the top 20 of lightweights and Palomino the same at welt.

Either one could qualify for a top 20 in their respective weights. Besides which, who made up this "rule" that only the first 20 fighters in each weight class are allowed to be called great? :huh

[My2Sense]

Palomino is a HOF'er because people liked the mustache and Buchanan is a HOF'er because people felt sorry about the groin punch. You're right, Dejesus isn't great if he doesn't make a top twenty list of one of the deepest, richest, oldest divisions in the sport, yadda, yadda, yadda, yadda.

:lol::rofl

[bodhi]

One bad night and Mayweather at is best is not that good? Is that how it works? Duran quit against Ray Leonard this means he would quit under any adverse sittuition. That is the logic you are using. I personaly think your wrong, but what do I know?

What has tthe second Leonard fight to do with Duran's lw performances? And why does the excuse of a bad night get consideration for Mayweather but not Duran? Double standards. Mayweather never proved himself like Duran did. I can't see him beating Duran.

[ripcity]

What has tthe second Leonard fight to do with Duran's lw performances? And why does the excuse of a bad night get consideration for Mayweather but not Duran? Double standards. Mayweather never proved himself like Duran did. I can't see him beating Duran.
Where do you see a dubbel standred?
Did you read the post the post you re responding to is a response to?
The logic of the post was that because Mayweather had one bad night he would not do will in a prime for prime match up with Duran. You may fel that Mayweather would beat Durn or that he wont. However to make that call based on an off night is very flawed. It would be just like saying Duran could not win big fights becsuse he had one bad night himself.

[itrymariti]

Where do you see a dubbel standred?
Did you read the post the post you re responding to is a response to?
The logic of the post was that because Mayweather had one bad night he would not do will in a prime for prime match up with Duran. You may fel that Mayweather would beat Durn or that he wont. However to make that call based on an off night is very flawed. It would be just like saying Duran could not win big fights becsuse he had one bad night himself.

It's got nothing to do with an off night. Duran performed consistently at the top level and showed what he was made of. Mayweather showed vulnerabilities in that fight, and hasn't since done enough for them to be ignored. Yes, he won the second fight, but it was hardly a schooling - and, indeed, if you're going to make injury excuses for Mayweather losing the first fight, why not make weight-drainage excuses for Castillo losing the second? The bottom line is that Mayweather is not even close to Duran's league in any possible respect. There's no need to even discuss it.

[itrymariti]

I'd like to see anyone surive that low blow after the bell. Duran should have been DQ'd.

Sweep aside the fact that he was winning virtually every round up to that point.

If you're going to talk about "should have"s, a lot of boxing history needs to be rewritten.

[Sweet Pea]

Where do you see a dubbel standred?
Did you read the post the post you re responding to is a response to?What the fuck?

[smitty_son408]

What the fuck?

:rofl:rofl:rofl

[bodhi]

Where do you see a dubbel standred?
Did you read the post the post you re responding to is a response to?
The logic of the post was that because Mayweather had one bad night he would not do will in a prime for prime match up with Duran. You may fel that Mayweather would beat Durn or that he wont. However to make that call based on an off night is very flawed. It would be just like saying Duran could not win big fights becsuse he had one bad night himself.

Yeah, I did. You excused Mayweather's loss to Castillo, to me it is one, with him having an off-night. On he other hand you use Duran's quitting, something he did exactly one in over 100 fights, as a reason for Mayweaher winning. If hat's not a double standard what is it then?

[ripcity]

Yeah, I did. You excused Mayweather's loss to Castillo, to me it is one, with him having an off-night. On he other hand you use Duran's quitting, something he did exactly one in over 100 fights, as a reason for Mayweaher winning. If hat's not a double standard what is it then?
Prehaps you should read my statment more carefuly. Had I stated that because Duran quit against Leonard he would have quit in any adverse sittuition. You would be right I would be presenting a dubble standered. However I stated the oppiset. My point was that you can't take a single bad preformance and judge their whole careers or make a prime/prime match up decision based on it.

[john garfield]

Many people say Roberto Duran is in the top 3 greatest fighter list. Is Duran overrated????? The man beat one great fighter in his career and then lost to that fighter when he quit!!!! Is Duran overrated??????

As a GREAT FIGHTER, ABSOLUTELY NOT!! PS. I won't dance on the head of a pin over top three.

[Boxed Ears]

Ah, now I remember.

[PowerPuncher]

Both

Underrated: Practically no one ranks him over Henry Armstrong or Ross for that matter who he is flat out better than imo and a comparable resume and the potential if given the chance to hold FW-WW titles simultaneously

Overrated: When people say he was past it/not prepared for all his losses. The myth that get's put about that he wasn't motivated for facing ATG's but was up for facing Davey Moore and Barkley. He had stylistic weaknesses like practically every boxer and his were elite level movement and counter boxers alongside speed but every boxer has issues with speed. His win over Barkley just isn't that good, I mean it's good but not really great and I don't care if he was 70 and he needed a poo in round 6, it doesn't make Barkley great

[frankenfrank]

Ah, now I remember.
1) good job.
2) some1 merge threads plz.
this , d first 1 :
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
d 2nd 1 , from 2day :
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
3) and some1 else , explain y 2 of d same

[frankenfrank]

Both

Underrated: Practically no one ranks him over Henry Armstrong or Ross for that matter who he is flat out better than imo and a comparable resume and the potential if given the chance to hold FW-WW titles simultaneously

Overrated: When people say he was past it/not prepared for all his losses. The myth that get's put about that he wasn't motivated for facing ATG's but was up for facing Davey Moore and Barkley. He had stylistic weaknesses like practically every boxer and his were elite level movement and counter boxers alongside speed but every boxer has issues with speed. His win over Barkley just isn't that good, I mean it's good but not really great and I don't care if he was 70 and he needed a poo in round 6, it doesn't make Barkley great
Duran quit vs. Leonard , Armstrong lasted d distance vs. Walker Smith Jr. .
reminder : Duran was a former 135 vs a 147.
Armstrong a former 126 vs a 147 who became d undisputed 160 king .
Also , Duran was dirty @ 135 , I still didn't read same thing regarding Armstrong @ any weight .
Yes , I rank Armstrong over Duran myself .
And no , I rank Duran over Ross myself .

[darling dame]

only gans leonard (benny ) could top roberto at light. but how can you say roberto overated he came 1 round of beating great hagler.