BoxRec

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 16:46

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑25 Feb 2019, 20:45 If they were the same weight at their best Duran would beat his ass something ugly. Virgil hill wasn't as good as dejesus, palomino or Marcel. You just don't know who the fighters are. Not to mention beating g Barkley at 37 was more impressive than the Hopkins win. Duran beat Castro at light heavy. Don't know why I bother with your trolling.

HEY!!! Wake up!!!!

The Palomino and Marcel arguments seem especially silly. If they are at the same level as Virgil Hill let alone above him why didn't they accomplish more in their careers? What are their most impressive wins? Why couldn't they do what Hill did?

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 16:49 The Palomino and Marcel arguments seem especially silly. If they are at the same level as Virgil Hill let alone above him why didn't they accomplish more in their careers? What are their most impressive wins? Why couldn't they do what Hill did?

I don't remember Hill having a great career, or fighting successfully in a high talent era. I'm going on memory of course. I'll look into that further. Duran was simply better and for a longer period of time. Even after some losses he went on to achieve more successes.

As far as Duran's weight climbing exploits go and successes against larger men there are guys like Mickey Walker who have Duran beat in that category yet don't feature in any top 10 lists I have ever encountered.

Mickey Walker was a welterweight who beat top heavyweights and earned a draw with champion Jack Sharkey. James Toney was a middleweight who enjoyed successes all the way up to heavyweight yet somehow nobody argues these guys rank in the top 10 yet somehow with Duran its proof of his greatness.

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 16:52 As far as Duran's weight climbing exploits go and successes against larger men there are guys like Mickey Walker who have Duran beat in that category yet don't feature in any top 10 lists I have ever encountered.

Mickey Walker was a welterweight who beat top heavyweights and earned a draw with champion Jack Sharkey. James Toney was a middleweight who enjoyed successes all the way up to heavyweight yet somehow nobody argues these guys rank in the top 10 yet somehow with Duran its proof of his greatness.

That's fine, Cojimar, but we're discussing Duran and RJJ here.

The argument for Duran seems to be that he aged better and had more success against larger men. It's fine to consider those points but I don't think that can be the sole criteria. You also have to consider dominance and quality of opposition.

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 17:29 The argument for Duran seems to be that he aged better and had more success against larger men. It's fine to consider those points but I don't think that can be the sole criteria. You also have to consider dominance and quality of opposition.

I think those defending Duran put forth those arguments in pretty convincing fashion. I just think you disagree with them. Sometimes that's just the way it is. I have no want to rehash them at this point.

It's difficult to bother with someone that can't figure out Marcel's best win.

I believe Marcel was an unranked prospect when he faced Duran. His later exploits once he emerged as a top contender are not especially relevant given the fight occurred in 1970 and not 1972/73.

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 16:46

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑25 Feb 2019, 20:45 If they were the same weight at their best Duran would beat his ass something ugly. Virgil hill wasn't as good as dejesus, palomino or Marcel. You just don't know who the fighters are. Not to mention beating g Barkley at 37 was more impressive than the Hopkins win. Duran beat Castro at light heavy. Don't know why I bother with your trolling.

LOL! Giving it back are ya!? That's OTO's favorite picture!

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 19:08 I believe Marcel was an unranked prospect when he faced Duran. His later exploits once he emerged as a top contender are not especially relevant given the fight occurred in 1970 and not 1972/73.

Duran was the prospect. Marcel was like 26-2. At the time they fought, neither were in their prime.

Yes Duran was also a prospect at the time. But Marcel hadn't beaten anyone highly ranked yet, all his best wins were well in the future and as of yet he wasn't even ranked in the top 10.

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 22:15 Yes Duran was also a prospect at the time. But Marcel hadn't beaten anyone highly ranked yet, all his best wins were well in the future and as of yet he wasn't even ranked in the top 10.

That's why I said, if you read it, that neither were in their prime.

Anyway, I find these guys a bit difficult to compare because their careers panned out so differently. Roy Jones had an extremely dominant peak and then fall off and started losing in disastrous fashion against everybody he faced who was world class and never again scored a notable win. Duran on the other hand was still able to score some impressive wins when well past his peak and fighting far above his optimal weight. Jones at least for me had the better peak but Duran obviously aged much better and had more success at higher weight classes.

Duran a level above here.

I have Duran 30-40 places higher

Cojimar 1946 wrote: ↑26 Feb 2019, 19:08 I believe Marcel was an unranked prospect when he faced Duran. His later exploits once he emerged as a top contender are not especially relevant given the fight occurred in 1970 and not 1972/73.

It was a big fight in Panama. Marcel was about a year removed from being robbed against Shibata and had already beaten Riasco and Caraballo, who were notable fighters.

Marlin Starfish wrote: ↑27 Feb 2019, 08:08 I have Duran 30-40 places higher

I don't have it even that close. I have Duran around#10. I have Jones around #70. Talent wise he was better than #70 ; but he simply didn't want to go the extra mile and beat better competition.

Cojimar always comes up with some bizarre logic. Always puffs up his guy and ignores the other guys big wins. Jumps all over any loss the other guy had.

Yes Duran lost to DeJesus. Fair enough to count that against him. However Jones managed to lose to Montell Griffin. Somehow there is no mention of that. DeJesus was better than Griffin; therefore Jones' loss hurt him more than Duran's.

Hopkins was at least 3 years from his prime when Jones beat him.

Virgil Hill? Well he was never that great. He was clearly fading by the time Jones beat him.
Duran has at least 7 wins that are more impressive than Jones' wins over Hill. You could probably argue that even beating Davey Moore was more impressive.

Marlin Starfish wrote: ↑27 Feb 2019, 08:08 I have Duran 30-40 places higher

Duran @ #4
Jones @ #64

That seems pretty fair to me.

the griffin fight was a dq in a fight jones was winning so hardly comparable to durans loss to dejesus

Winning handily? What in the world are you talking about?
Most people thought Griffin was winning the fight. The officials had it very close.

DQs count. (Assuming it's not a terrible decision by the referee)

You get DQ'd you lost. Otherwise you might as well DQ yourself on purpose if you think you are losing.

Duran is way ahead of Jones in achievements. In the 70s he went 62-1 as the dominate lightweight in the world for 7 years and 12 title defences. Then in the 80s he rolled with some of the greatest fighters of all time, all bigger than him. He was the only man to beat SRL in his prime, went 15 with hagler, beat a host of top fighters. He's all time p4p back end top ten for me.

Jones had immense talent but only really 2 good wins. Never really tested himself in his prime, didn't fight his main rival and then was beaten by a host of inferiors. He's top 30/40 for me.

cfang wrote: ↑27 Feb 2019, 16:53 Duran is way ahead of Jones in achievements. In the 70s he went 62-1 as the dominate lightweight in the world for 7 years and 12 title defences. Then in the 80s he rolled with some of the greatest fighters of all time, all bigger than him. He was the only man to beat SRL in his prime, went 15 with hagler, beat a host of top fighters. He's all time p4p back end top ten for me.

Jones had immense talent but only really 2 good wins. Never really tested himself in his prime, didn't fight his main rival and then was beaten by a host of inferiors. He's top 30/40 for me.

Duran was 72-1, 56KOs before "No Mas"

Of course, Duran. His resume is filled with more elites.

Griffin had been dropped twice and was dropped and badly hurt right before the DQ. Jones had clearly taken over and was on his way to scoring a stoppage win. I think it's vastly more likely that without the DQ Roy Jones wins the fight by stoppage. A DQ in a fight a guy is winning is not a loss in my book.

George Foreman hit Jose Roman when Roman was down. If Foreman had been DQ'd I doubt people would hold that against him legacy wise. Duran could have been DQ'd against Buchanan for hitting him low after the bell. He was lucky not to be disqualified but things easily could have gone differently with another referee.