BoxRec

Top 20 might be about right, top 15 may be a little high for Roberto at welterweight.

LEONARD did not had nothing to cry about because he CLEARLY LOST AND GOT WHUPPED...HE EVEN MENTIONED IT THAT DURAN TOOK HIM TO SCHOOL...A ligtweight did that. He even embarrassed him in the last round with "hit my chin, hit my chin"...So for that, he had to ask for a rematch quickly.

Again with the lightweight stuff. It had already been around 3 years and 9 fights since Duran fought at the weight and he was only 29. Yet you insist on referring to him as a lightweight to make a very impressive performance seem even more so. Leonard had nothing to be embarrassed about. It wasn't a one sided fight and he took the loss like a man. He didn't quit in frustration like Duran did in the second fight. Taken to school? No, Leonard totally OUTCLASSED him.
As for a quick rematch, five months is not that short a time between fights, especially back then. In fact Duran rarely ever took even that long between fights before. If indeed he beat Leonard as badly as you claim he did, wouldn't Leonard be at a disadvantage fighting only five months later?

AS FOR Hagler, he did not looked like the Marvelous fighter that I was accostumed to see in the early 80s. He even looked slow and clumsy, compared to the Leonard in 80 and in his prime, Leonard was better than that version of Hagler...Plus, Hagler was in his 30s, it was time to lose some how, some day. Do not expect to win as many fights when you are in your 30s just the same when you are in your 20s....It is not the same.

you are always so one sided when it comes to Leonard. What about him? Hagler may not have been in exactly peak condition but as someone pointed out earlier, Leonard was out of the ring for 3 years and it was his first fight at middleweight. No warm ups to get rid of ring rust but straight to the man still considered far and away the best in the division.

Duran beat more world champions and more hall of famers than Leonard

Leonard and Buchanan are Duran's most impressive wins although the Buchanan win is controversial. I still give him credit for it because he would have most likely won it anyway.
Palomino and Cuevas? Way past their prime and questionable HOFamers at their best.
HOFamers Leonard beat? Hearns, Benitez, Hagler and Duran himself. A much more impressive listed, especially with the fact that 3 of those other fighters hold victories over Duran themselves.

Duran, a lightweight, kick Leonard's butt.

When Duran was at his 13th year as pro, he was 72-1 with 56KOs

Okay, so how does that prove he was better than Leonard? Leonard didn't fight many gimme fights. Duran as a top contender fought allot of garbage opponents. In fact the fighter he fought right before he fought for the title was making his debut! In fact after he won the lightweight title, Duran fought 6 fighters with no wins whatsoever and 6 others with horrible losing records.

..Had ONLY one fight at middleweight, never defended the middle crown, fought 3 fights in 6 years and got a GIFT OF 2 TITLES IN ONE NIGHT, WHICH IS OVERRATED

That one fight meant ALOT. However, I agree totally with the last point of the sentence.

Benitez and Duran were not natural welters...one was a jr welter and the other one a lightweight that kick his ass IN THE BIGGEST AND MOST ANTICIPATED FIGHT OUTSIDE THE HEAVYWEIGHT FIGHTS.

Benitez was a Jr. Welter when Leonard beat him now?! Benitez as a welterweight beat 3 top ten contenders and Palomino in his prime before fighting Leonard!

Then, the Sugar Man, seeing that he was EMBARRASSED the first time, asks for a quick rematch without Duran having the opportunity to have an easy title defense against Boy Green or somebody else like Bruce Finch??? Gimmie a break.

Again why was five months not long enough? who held the gun to Duran's head? Who EMBARRASSED himself in the rematch when he saw there was no way he was going to win?

This guy Duran, got to be in the top 5 greatest fighters of all time... I do not see it no other way.

Top ten is arguable. Top five? No way is he better than Ali,Robinson,Greb, Armstrong, Langford,Pep or Leonard. Probably Benny, the other Leonard too!

elmersalsa wrote:

theone wrote:

Just like every ALMOST Puerto Rican in this world, would always hate a Roberto Duran, instead of being proud of their Latin hero. Oooh I forgot, this Puerto Ricans think they are AMERICANS...SORRY GUYS
Since nono of their great boxers could not beat him at Duran's best, they always want to come up with the No Mas fiasco...And I will write it big so that you can read it....HATER!!!
NO PUERTO RICAN BEAT LEONARD AT HIS BEST AND THAT HURTS FOR LIKE PEOPLE LIKE THE ONE

Dude, why are you taking this debate down this road?
I dont appreciate being acussed of being a racist nor having racist statements
slung at me either. You should be ashamed of yourself for writing a statement like that.

Yo man, my name is Elmer and not dude...It is true that most of the Puerto Ricans do not like Duran... I can see why. ....dude!!!

Mr. Elmer
How many Puerto Ricans do you know? I think you are making this up because I grew up in Puerto Rico and Duran was one of our heroes along with Arguello and many others. And your statement that nobody beat Duran at his best is wrong. De Jesus did it, Leonard did it and Benitez did it. Deal with it.
And BTW THE ONLY ONE TROWING ACCUSATIONS OF HATE IS YOU, I'M JUST REPLYING AS POLITELY AS POSSIBLE. THANKS.

Decagon wrote:

Borinken25 wrote:And your statement that nobody beat Duran at his best is wrong. De Jesus did it, Leonard did it and Benitez did it. Deal with it.

Duran wasn't at his best in 1982. Heck, he wasn't at his best in 1972, either.

Yes Duran wasn’t at his best, but it was close enough. To claim that he was washed up at that point is insane. First after he lost to Benitez he went on and totally destroyed Moore and Cuevas, have a very competitive fight against Hagler and whether he deserved the decision or not it was close against Barkley. And the fight with Benitez he just couldn’t decipher Benitez defense and movement.

Decagon wrote:So many of your posts deal in absolutes. Where did I say he was washed up? You said that he was at his best in 1972 and 1982. That was completely wrong. Deal with it.

In terms of % what was Duran % in 1972 and 1982? Can you say 95% in 1972 and 85% in 1982. More or less what is your opinion?

Decagon wrote:My opinion is that it's stupid to say that he was at his best, because he wasn't. Percentages are irrelevant in this discussion. You were simply wrong.

You really never knew how Duran was going to fight.. He became somewhat inconsistent when he moved up in weight..

Decagon wrote:My opinion is that it's stupid to say that he was at his best, because he wasn't. Percentages are irrelevant in this discussion. You were simply wrong.

So smart guy tell me at what point was Duran at his best? After the first De Jesus fight and up to the first fight vs. Leonard? At what point was his best? Because between those fight he mostly fought cab drivers and bums. Only names in between those fights are De Jesus and Palomino other than that it was very average fighters. Of course you look great against cab drivers. Please enlighten me with your insults and stupidity. At the very least you can keep it civilized. You must think that this is Burger King where you can have it your way. Uh…

theone wrote:

LEONARD did not had nothing to cry about because he CLEARLY LOST AND GOT WHUPPED...HE EVEN MENTIONED IT THAT DURAN TOOK HIM TO SCHOOL...A ligtweight did that. He even embarrassed him in the last round with "hit my chin, hit my chin"...So for that, he had to ask for a rematch quickly.

Again with the lightweight stuff. It had already been around 3 years and 9 fights since Duran fought at the weight and he was only 29. Yet you insist on referring to him as a lightweight to make a very impressive performance seem even more so. Leonard had nothing to be embarrassed about. It wasn't a one sided fight and he took the loss like a man. He didn't quit in frustration like Duran did in the second fight. Taken to school? No, Leonard totally OUTCLASSED him.
As for a quick rematch, five months is not that short a time between fights, especially back then. In fact Duran rarely ever took even that long between fights before. If indeed he beat Leonard as badly as you claim he did, wouldn't Leonard be at a disadvantage fighting only five months later?

He was a lightweight. He is considered a lightweight. He was not a natural welterweight. Just like Leonard was a welter great, Duran is associated with the lightweight division.
You could say that Leonard embarrassed Duran all that you want... But he got whupped in the first fight... See his face before or after the fight. Leonard did not looked that pretty.

DID YOU SEE THE LUMP THAT HE GOT AFTER THE FIGHT??? Does that looked like a whupped fighter or what??? Do not look just the highlights, my friend, watch the whole fight. He got embarrassed by lightweight...That is why a remacth had to be done quickly and all costs, because the American darling got whupped. He would have been more whupped if he did not clutch and hold and grab like a sissy...What a shame, a welterweight, that is stronger had to clutch a lightweight???

And I can see that you do not see Duran's ledger in how much time he gets breaks before and after fights.

AS FOR Hagler, he did not looked like the Marvelous fighter that I was accostumed to see in the early 80s. He even looked slow and clumsy, compared to the Leonard in 80 and in his prime, Leonard was better than that version of Hagler...Plus, Hagler was in his 30s, it was time to lose some how, some day. Do not expect to win as many fights when you are in your 30s just the same when you are in your 20s....It is not the same.

you are always so one sided when it comes to Leonard. What about him? Hagler may not have been in exactly peak condition but as someone pointed out earlier, Leonard was out of the ring for 3 years and it was his first fight at middleweight. No warm ups to get rid of ring rust but straight to the man still considered far and away the best in the division.

Leonard is one of my favorite fighters. But of all the fighters in history, I have never seen a fighter that got more breaks and stipulations than Sugar Ray. Ali got breaks and never got disqualified for holding someone behind the neck. He lost also a lots of fights that the judges gave it to him because he was the money. The same could be said about Leonard. Leonard got away with the second Hearns fight which he clearly lost. Got to have a LARGER RING to fight Hagler and Duran. NO thumbs in the gloves for the Hagler fight. And the other stipulation: 12 rounds. Add that he is the darling of the media, the good looking all American boy, and you got a star that cannot be beaten by the judges. Hagler not only had to fight Leonard, he had to fight also the judges and the American media.
That 3 years layoff was a bunch of hog wash and baloney. Do you really believe that Hagler was at his best??? Leonard admittely himself said that it was the right time to fight Hagler. The fight should have been 5 years earlier, and it showed. Duran fought Hagler in the middle of Hagler's prime, being washed up. And after 12 rounds, he was ahead in the scorecards. If the fight were 12 rounds, Duran would have written a better history, but it would have been TOO MUCH FOR YOU TO HANDLE IT.

Duran beat more world champions and more hall of famers than Leonard

Leonard and Buchanan are Duran's most impressive wins although the Buchanan win is controversial. I still give him credit for it because he would have most likely won it anyway.
Palomino and Cuevas? Way past their prime and questionable HOFamers at their best.
HOFamers Leonard beat? Hearns, Benitez, Hagler and Duran himself. A much more impressive listed, especially with the fact that 3 of those other fighters hold victories over Duran themselves.

What about Ernesto Marcel??? Was not he a great fighter??? He beat Alexis Arguello in his prime, did not he??? Duran outclassed him in 9 rounds.

What about the great Esteban DeJesus??? Ain't he a great lightweight???. He fought 33 times at 135 and ONLY LOST TO DURAN at 135..He did not lose to nobody else at lightweight...No shame in that. He even beat Duran.

Palomino and Cuevas are Hall of Famers, like it or not. Duran whupped Palomino in his prime. Palomino was also whupped by a lightweight. Palomino, like it or not, got to be in the top 20 welters of all time, the same with Pipino.

You do not look nor investigate the facts of boxing...That it what it seems to me. You do not considered when Pipino fought Duran, the fight was billed "La Noche de los Acabados" ...Do you remember that or you cannot read Spanish??? Oooohhhh, I am sorry, you are from the Bronx, not Puerto Rico... you are American...At least that is what your thinking is...sorry. Maybe Sugar Ray should have been Puerto Rican or from the Bronx. That would have been more satisfactory for you.

When Duran was at his 13th year as pro, he was 72-1 with 56KOs

Okay, so how does that prove he was better than Leonard? Leonard didn't fight many gimme fights. Duran as a top contender fought allot of garbage opponents. In fact the fighter he fought right before he fought for the title was making his debut! In fact after he won the lightweight title, Duran fought 6 fighters with no wins whatsoever and 6 others with horrible losing records.

Again, it seems that you do not look at Duran's ledger. Duran has more KOs than Leonard had fights. Had more longevity. Leonard never went more than 5 years. After 5 years, he was not the same. Duran fought for 13 years straight, being the best in the world pound per pound for a long period of time, and even before the Leonard fight was already considered a legend. Leonard got GIMMIE FIGHTS TOO. Just like Duran. Or you gonna tell me that Boy Greens or Pete Ranzanys were better than Marcel, DeJesus, Hiroshi Kobayashi and Buchanan when Duran was fighting???. If you cannot see that, then, it seems to me that clearly you have not seen Duran's career. It is your playerhating that does not make you see.
When Duran left the lightweight crown in great fashion, he went to jr welter... See, obviously, you don't know that fact. He whupped Carlos Palomino, a HOF, like it or not, one sided. Palomino got whupped by a lightweight too.

..Had ONLY one fight at middleweight, never defended the middle crown, fought 3 fights in 6 years and got a GIFT OF 2 TITLES IN ONE NIGHT, WHICH IS OVERRATED

That one fight meant ALOT. However, I agree totally with the last point of the sentence.

You must agree with the last part of the sentence...It was OVERRATED. The Hagler fight was OK, I do not deny that, but what happened after he won the middle title??? He only fights one time at 160 and he is better than Duran and Hagler in that weight??? one fight??? The fight should have been in 1982 or 1983, not 5 years late, which brings a lots of questions marks in that "great victory"

Benitez and Duran were not natural welters...one was a jr welter and the other one a lightweight that kick his ass IN THE BIGGEST AND MOST ANTICIPATED FIGHT OUTSIDE THE HEAVYWEIGHT FIGHTS.

Benitez was a Jr. Welter when Leonard beat him now?! Benitez as a welterweight beat 3 top ten contenders and Palomino in his prime before fighting Leonard!

Benitez is considered a jr welterweight great. Leonard is considered a welter great and Duran is considered a lightweight great. Everybody is according to his weight class. Not even Sugar Ray Robinson was great at middleweight as much as welterweight. Benitez besides Palomino, who did he beat??? tomato cans at 147.

Then, the Sugar Man, seeing that he was EMBARRASSED the first time, asks for a quick rematch without Duran having the opportunity to have an easy title defense against Boy Green or somebody else like Bruce Finch??? Gimmie a break.

Again why was five months not long enough? who held the gun to Duran's head? Who EMBARRASSED himself in the rematch when he saw there was no way he was going to win?

5 months after a grueling fight is not enough. Specially when your quality of opposition is one of the all time best. You know what was the gun??? Duran's management team wanted the money, funded by Leonard and Mike Trainer. He saw Duran how he partied before and between fights. He caught Duran off guard...that's all. That Duran in New Orleans was not even half of the man that won in Montreal and it showed...THE FIGHT WAS LOST BEFORE THE OPENING BELL and Duran knew it. Even if Leonard would have slug it out vs Duran he would have won. He did not look at his best, not like in Montreal. Then, why there was not a rubber match to end the trilogy???. If I were Sugar Ray, I do not give Duran a rematch either...He ain't stupid, neither I am. The WHOLE IDEA WAS, WIN BACK THE TITLE, AND DO NOT GIVE DURAN A REMATCH...It worked.

This guy Duran, got to be in the top 5 greatest fighters of all time... I do not see it no other way.

Top ten is arguable. Top five? No way is he better than Ali,Robinson,Greb, Armstrong, Langford,Pep or Leonard. Probably Benny, the other Leonard too!

It because your playerhating does not let you see. Tell me which fighter can match his longevity, and go up in 4 weight classes winning 4 crowns, 2 of them when he was TOTALLY WASHED UP and out of his natural weight class??? Tell me who???
Leonard is not even cosidered as the best welter in history. Duran is considered BY MANY AND BAR NONE AS THE GREATEST LIGHTWEIGHT THAT EVER LIVED.

Duran fought more world title fights than Leonard, Pep, and Harry Greb.

Duran dominated his division way much better than all of them mentioned...Probably not better than Robinson, but who would have better dominion in his own weight class than Robinson??? Not many

I can see Robinson, Ali, and Armstrong and Joe Louis better than Roberto Duran. That is it. The rest of them does not have Duran's legacy.

Pep, Greb, Langford nor Ray Leonard have more history nor more accomplishments than Duran. They probably beat better fighters, but Duran beat also great fighters.

Pep was awesome at 126...Goes at 135 and Sammy Angott made him see reality. He never beat someone bigger and great above his own weight class. He even got whupped 3 times by Sandy Saddler in his prime. Duran never lost 3 times to anybody. Neither in his prime he lost at 135 against someone 3 times. Tell me a fighter that Pep beat above 126 that was of Leonard's quality in the biggest stage of all time aside from the heavyweight ranks???

Greb was awesome at 160, but in his prime lost twice to Tiger Flowers and lost to Gene Tunney twice..I understand that Tunney was bigger and stronger and that he beat Tunney the first time around. Greb had 300 fights, which is something great to me, but many of those fights were non decisions, which to me does not mean nothing. Either you win, lose or draw...Well, that was the ND era. Greb compared to Duran at lightweight in division domination is a mismatch. How can we rate their dominance when someone made 12 title defenses, 11 by KO, 10 straight by KO in 7 years???

Langford was awesome. And if someone tells me that he was better than Duran, I would not argue it. He fought middles, light heavys and heavyweights being a welterweight himself which is a great feat. But he did not dominate no weight class like Duran did, and you do not have to a champion to do it. Ezzard Charles was not champion when he totally dominated the light heavys, whipping Archie Moore 3 times in the process. Duran totally decimated the lightweight division just like Wilfredo Gomez or Carlos Monzon or Robinson did.

Every body got their own criteria about ranking the greats. You may not see Duran between the 5 very best or not even in the top 10. I could live with that. NO PROBLEM. I KNOW MANY PUERTO RICANS THAT THINK LIKE YOU.