BoxRec

If we put Duran in any other lightweight era outside of the late 1970s how would he would done in any other lightweight era could he still been champ in any eras?

I like Duran in any era except against Ike Williams, Carlos Ortiz and Joe Brown when they were at their peaks.I'm not sure about Bob Montgomery. What do you think?

goose 5 wrote: ↑13 Jul 2025, 10:56 I like Duran in any era except against Ike Williams, Carlos Ortiz and Joe Brown when they were at their peaks.I'm not sure about Bob Montgomery. What do you think?

I think that the great Roberto Duran would have been good or great in any era. The guy was a beast!

I just can't see how those lightweights of any era could cope with the aggressive and relentless pressure of the great Roberto Duran.

There’s a long list of lightweights who could certainly deal with his aggression, ferocity etc.
Duran was great because he was able to apply very good head movement and defense while being aggressive. He was elusive and a good counter puncher.

In some eras he would have dominated. Obviously there were some other eras which was a lot stronger than the one he fought in.

Had he fought in the 1930s he certainly would have had losses with guys like Canzoneri, Ross, Ambers, and Armstrong around.

Or later on with Angott, Jack, Montgomery, Williams etc.

Expug wrote: ↑14 Jul 2025, 14:18 There’s a long list of lightweights who could certainly deal with his aggression, ferocity etc.
Duran was great because he was able to apply very good head movement and defense while being aggressive. He was elusive and a good counter puncher.

Yes, totally agree. Maybe the best defence of an offensive and aggressive fighter.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑14 Jul 2025, 21:07 In some eras he would have dominated. Obviously there were some other eras which was a lot stronger than the one he fought in.

Had he fought in the 1930s he certainly would have had losses with guys like Canzoneri, Ross, Ambers, and Armstrong around.

Or later on with Angott, Jack, Montgomery, Williams etc.

Duran would have still dominate.

elmersalsa wrote: ↑18 Jul 2025, 14:54

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑14 Jul 2025, 21:07 In some eras he would have dominated. Obviously there were some other eras which was a lot stronger than the one he fought in.

Had he fought in the 1930s he certainly would have had losses with guys like Canzoneri, Ross, Ambers, and Armstrong around.

Or later on with Angott, Jack, Montgomery, Williams etc.

Duran would have still dominate.

I agree with you. I also think he would lose a few more at lightweight than the one loss at 135 he has. But I would put money on Dyran coming out on top in a 2 out of 3 with any lightweight in history

There is a difference between "dominating" and merely being the best. I think her would have come out as the best in the eras that I mentioned. However, they were much stronger than the era that he did fight in. He would have lost from time to time. He would not have been the champion for 6 straight years.

Not with a guy who several times defended his Welterweight crown while weighing in within the Lightweight limit.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑18 Jul 2025, 19:39 There is a difference between "dominating" and merely being the best. I think her would have come out as the best in the eras that I mentioned. However, they were much stronger than the era that he did fight in. He would have lost from time to time. He would not have been the champion for 6 straight years.

If the great Ike Williams held the lightweight crown for 6 years, why would not Roberto Duran?

Joe Brown held the lightweight crown for 6 years also. Why not Duran?

Duran was a different class. His fighting arsenal was complete. The guy was from another planet. I can see why he's ranked as the greatest lightweight boxer of all-time.

I can't imagine Duran wouldn't be able to be a Champion in any era. He may not always have reigned for multiple years, but I think he could've mixed with the very best of 'em of any era. He ultimately would always have a relatively short stay in the Lightweight class because he likes to eat and party, and he'd always eat himself out of the weight class eventually

elmersalsa wrote: ↑20 Jul 2025, 17:58

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑18 Jul 2025, 19:39 There is a difference between "dominating" and merely being the best. I think her would have come out as the best in the eras that I mentioned. However, they were much stronger than the era that he did fight in. He would have lost from time to time. He would not have been the champion for 6 straight years.

If the great Ike Williams held the lightweight crown for 6 years, why would not Roberto Duran?

Joe Brown held the lightweight crown for 6 years also. Why not Duran?

Duran was a different class. His fighting arsenal was complete. The guy was from another planet. I can see why he's ranked as the greatest lightweight boxer of all-time.

At certain times, he could have had the title for 6 years or so. Other times, probably not.
Like I said, in the 1930s there was Canzoneri, Ross, Armstrong and ambers. He probably would have lost at one time or another.
In the early 1940s there was Angott, Jack, Montgomery and Williams. Once again, he probably would have been considered the best but would have lost at a certain.

Benny Leonard held the title almost 8 years in a stronger era.

This might be the part where we start hearing about how good Ray Lampkin was.

Roberto Duran's arsenal was too good that he would have dominate any lightweight era. I have seen the lightweights before Duran, and the only one that impressed me the most was the great Ike Williams.

Any other lightweight? I would favor Duran. The guy was in another level.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑21 Jul 2025, 20:23 This might be the part where we start hearing about how good Ray Lampkin was.

Ray Lampkin was very good. He was good enough to be NABF Lightweight Champion. He had the balls to travel all the way to Panama City, Panama and give Roberto Duran one of his toughest fights of his career. And he was exchanging blow for blow in the intense Panamanian heat for 14 rounds!

Interesting enough, for a lightweight champion, Robert Duran had fought up to he was 50 years old.
Most lightweight Champions seemed to had lost or started loosing their fighting abilities
when they turned 28/29 years old
(such as Benny leonard and Barney Ross)
BTW Ray Arcel had trained both Benny Leonard (as a welterweight in the 1930's during his comeback )
and Roberto Duran in the 1970's.

What about against Joe Gans aka the "Old Master" and Battling Nelson ?

Great fighters as well. Gans would have been a lot of trouble for him. Against a skilled boxer who fought scientifically, Duran was very vulnerable. Wasn't complete enough. He probably would have done better against Nelson.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑23 Jul 2025, 20:02 Great fighters as well. Gans would have been a lot of trouble for him. Against a skilled boxer who fought scientifically, Duran was very vulnerable. Wasn't complete enough. He probably would have done better against Nelson.

That Duran wasn't complete enough? Surely you don't know nothing about the great Roberto Duran. And that's very sad.

elmersalsa wrote: ↑22 Jul 2025, 17:30 Ray Lampkin was very good. He was good enough to be NABF Lightweight Champion.

Jaywheel wrote: ↑24 Jul 2025, 10:13

elmersalsa wrote: ↑22 Jul 2025, 17:30 Ray Lampkin was very good. He was good enough to be NABF Lightweight Champion.

What do you know?

Pernell Whitaker would have made him quit.