Leonard Was Better Than Duran AT Lightweight.
Posted: 19 Sep 2010, 10:51
Benny Leonard would have beaten Duran comfortably IMHO. Leonard was truelly untouchable in his day.
I've seen many of Leonard's fights on tape - via a connection I used to have in New York.King Carlos wrote:What footage is this based on?
Nonsense.Idisagree wrote:Duran was the Superman of boxing. According to many he did not lose any fights and was invincible. The fights that he lost were simply that he lost, not that the other fighter won.
You have to admit, though --- if anyone gets the good end of total, undying favouritism among the great Lightweights, it's Duran.Diamond WEAPON wrote:Thanks for further making BOTP a pain in the ass to post in. I hate this "Well he fought in the old days, so he must be better" bullshit.
Really? As far as I know only two even exist on film (one of his bouts with Tendler and his pole-axing at the hands of Jimmy McLarnin during his comeback).keithmoonhangover wrote:I've seen many of Leonard's fights on tape - via a connection I used to have in New York.King Carlos wrote:What footage is this based on?
Whitaker does too. A lot of guys who were the clear "best of their era" have this problem. I think Duran particularly gets it because he was the first crossover Hispanic Boxing star in the United States specifically on top of being a P4P guy and such.Goodnight, Irene wrote:You have to admit, though --- if anyone gets the good end of total, undying favouritism among the great Lightweights, it's Duran.Diamond WEAPON wrote:Thanks for further making BOTP a pain in the ass to post in. I hate this "Well he fought in the old days, so he must be better" bullshit.
If we are talking about Duran lightweight then he was the man of his era, he had one loss in over 70 fights to Esteban DeJeus in a non-title bout, which Duran later avenged twice by ko. The only defeat you can talk about at lightweight is the DeJesus one.Idisagree wrote:Duran was the Superman of boxing. According to many he did not lose any fights and was invincible. The fights that he lost were simply that he lost, not that the other fighter won.
AgreeSeamus wrote:Anyone who thinks Duran was better hands down needs to seriously examine Benny Leonard's record from about 1917 to 1924, while keeping in mind that he was also fighting clearly tougher oppostition.
More objective thinking & sound logic. This is a house of Roberto --- it will not stand.Seamus wrote:Anyone who thinks Duran was better hands down needs to seriously examine Benny Leonard's record from about 1917 to 1924, while keeping in mind that he was also fighting clearly tougher oppostition.
Even the often forgotten and underrated Carlos Oritz faced much more tougher opposition than Duran at lightweight.Goodnight, Irene wrote:More objective thinking & sound logic. This is a house of Roberto --- it will not stand.Seamus wrote:Anyone who thinks Duran was better hands down needs to seriously examine Benny Leonard's record from about 1917 to 1924, while keeping in mind that he was also fighting clearly tougher oppostition.