Duran is The Greatest Fighter of All Time

Let's be real though, towards the end of his lightweight reign Duran would have crushed any lightweight in history. The guy with the best chance of winning is Whitaker.

When you look at fighting ability and dominance of reign combined, Duran is clearly the best lightweight ever.

 

barney ross would have a thing or two to say about that

 

Lets be real. LW is the most loaded division in history, Duran wouldnt even get near to dominating Armstrong, Leonard, Whitaker, Ross, and on it goes.

 

I really need to learn more. I've probably watched as much old boxing footage as anyone. I've sought out every available clip to learn about guys from eras that pre-date mine.

Oddly I have never felt comfortable in speaking about how sure I am that guys like Barney Ross or Benny Leonard could beat anyone based on limited grainy black & white clips with inconsistent film speed.

Or is it the still images that I'm not reading enough into? Maybe that's where the key to vast boxing knowledge lies.

 

I have sincere doubts about Armstrong, Leonard or Ross lasting 8 rounds with JMM let alone Duran. I'm afraid what you're doing is starting with the premise that they were great fighters by todays standards based on written reports from the time then watching the footage looking for confirmatory evidence of that. It's kinda the scientific method in reverse Im afraid.

I don't see anything that those guys were doing in the 20s and 30s that convinces me they hang with modern fighters. I'd love to have it pointed out, but to be truthful I just can't see it.

 

Armstrong PERHAPS, Based on Sheer VOLUME Punching & his Wreckless, Balls to the Wall Style...But agREED on Ross & Leonard...



REED

 

Totally agree Hut.

No disrespect to Armstrong, Ross etc. AMAZING fighters for their day.

But that's the context they have to be judged, for their day.

They were downright crude compared to modern fighters.

Head to head Duran would have obliterated any of them, including Armstrong. Armstrong was superb, but that style wouldn't work against the vastly superior technical ability and defense of Duran.

Boxing has evolved, just like everything else.

Mainframe Computers in the 60's were great for their day, now you get more power from a bus stop sign or billboard or 10 quid personal organiser ::

MMA is a great example. Because it's a new sport is shows the accelerated evolution happening right in front of you.

Guys from the 90's, brilliant for their day would get dominated against the current more polished, evolved MMA fighters.

 

I'm just not sold on Armstrong's defence. Im open to having it explained to me, but as far as I can see it's just painfully rudimentary in modern terms and leaves him literally wide open to say a Marquez type counter puncher.

I think that was part of Joe Louis' success - thats general style of defence was so prevalent & it was crying out to be exploited by a somebody who could throw technically precise, short punches as a guy was coming in.

 

I think they still deserve ALL the regard they get as innovators and geniuses. It's like judging intellectuals & scientists - they can only swim in the water of their time and take the steps infront of their feet.

And I think all time lists should first and foremost judge guys' greatness relative to their own time (just as we judge guy's relative to their own weight). Judge guys by how many steps they take, not where they started on the road.

But yeah....the sport evolved. How much since, say, the 70s is open to debate, IMO, but between the 20s and 70s the gap looks pretty monumental. To say otherwise is romanticism I think (which is cool).

 

Armstrong's Defense BLOWED for Sure, by Modern Day Standards...But his OFFENSE would've Been Successful in ANY Era...Aaron Pryor was Henry Armstrong w/SLIGHTLY Better Defense...If Anyone Could LURE Duran into a Back Alley Brawl, it's Henry Armstrong & if the Fight is Reduced to a Test of WILLS & STAMINA, Who Wins???...

Granted, REED Only Gives Armstrong a 30% Chance of Beating Duran, which is Considerably HIGHER than the Chances Ross or Leonard would have...



REED

 

Im always intrigued by how few clean shots he seems to take though. That's what opens the door in my mind to the possibility that there's something Im missing. Certainly on the inside, he defends himself by using the other guys own head & shoulders quite ingeniously. Between punching he'll literally come round at an angle, and rest his head on an opponents left shoulder so he can't use his left, but can't throw his right at him either. It works better against taller guys which probably partly explains why he did so well up the weights.

Damn Im watching more footage right now and he's terrifyingly relentless. Literally doesn't stop coming at a guy for a single second. Difficult to deal with. I might have to rethink my dismissiveness. Once he's inside he's safe, & he moves his head enough on the outside to dodge enough and so relentless with his feet that you don't get much opportunity to work on him out there before he's right on your chest again.

Must of been HORRIBLE to fight. Like being very slowly drowned.

 

Armstrong is an amazing fighter to watch, and like I said - for his day, incredible.

But I maintain that compared to Duran era fighters onwards, pretty crude.

I don't think a fight between him and Duran would be close, partly because he doesn't have the style to trouble Duran, and he's smaller.

I see REED's point that if anyone would be successful in the modern era, it would be him, through sheer relentlessness and insanity. Not many people are great at dealing with that level of pressure.

 

Duran wouldnt walk over him in a hundred fights, regardless of outcome.

 

Duran is either the best lightweight ever or the second best ever (depending on where you rank whitaker)

Armstrong spent about 5 minutes at lightweight, he did his best work against the best comp at Featherweight and he did a lot at Welterweight as well... Personally, I think by the 1930s, you are dealing with a pretty serious class of fighters... I dont see anyone easily beating Armstrong ever... he was profoundly strong and active

1935 is not the same as 1915 by a long shot... the difference between the two is jaw-dropping

That said, the notion that Benny Leonard (a great 19-teens and 1920s lightweight and a major "cutie" by the standards of that era) would be able to outbox Roberto Duran is insane... Barney Ross would also take a prolonged beating and had nowhere near the punch needed to get Duran's respect

Ray Arcel being 355 years old had a lot to do with his observation, not to mention his being jewish (Leonard and Ross were MAJOR heroes in the jewish community) ... it'd be like asking Hex-One for an objective opinion on Felix Trinidad or Miguel Cotto

Nat Fleisher thought Joe Gans was better than the contemporary lightweights he watched, such as (think of all of these, for real) Ike Williams, Joe Brown, Carlos Ortiz, Duran, DeJesus, Benny Leonard, Canzoneri (for the few minutes he was a lightweight) ... Benny Leonard gets Joe Gans out of there inside of a round or two... the rest of those guys beat Benny Leonard, just to give you a bit of perspective

 

^
What the taig said.

 

cheers, fellow Hib

 

Not to take anything away from Leonard who put on a phenominal show in the remtach, but the difference is Duran's physique and confidence was much more dramatic then the change in Leonard's game plan.

Wether you like Duran or not, it is impossbile to deny that it was almost like two different men in each fight. This is not to make an excuse for the loss, your right he knew there would be a rematch and also Leonard's game plan in the second fight might have been enough to beat the Duran he faced in the first fight...... we'll never know.

 

That's my point.

No one can tell me with a straight face it was the same Duran from the first fight. Anyone who thinks that is either blind or a proper Duran hater.

It would be like saying Roy looked the same after coming down from heavyweight.

 

Duran never looked the same after Leonard 1, did he? That poor bastard peaked at age 29 never to return to his prime. Thank god for Davey Moore, I guess.

 

What makes Duran so good?

 

His hair.

 

Fantastic reflexes and defense while still pressuring and attacking... a prodigous body attack, a superbly heavy and accurate right hand... a terrific chin... the desire to dominate... his entire reign as Lightweight champ... the little cherries on top of the cake from all of the other stuff he did afterwards... the real DURAN was the 135 Duran, everything after that is just extra, sometimes its gravy, other times its mud

 

Cool. Any fights i should look out for to show his greatness?

 

<iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ngDJ2cCpR4o" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

either of the returns against DeJesus

as well as bouts against Lampkin, Vilomar Fernandez, Hector Thompson, Ken Buchanan (despite the controversial end) , Ishimatsu "Guts" Suzuki... all those are superb showcases of Duran breaking down and battering an assortment of very talented lightweights who offered a variety of different styles to contend with

 

Like cdogg said, Duran at his very best was towards the end of his lightweight reign.

I think it was Guts Suzuki he hit with such a hard right hand, Suzuki's head changed shape upon impact :: ::

Plus his first 2 fights at WW IMO he was still at his peak, and looked just as good as the best lightweight Duran.

RJJ - To expand upon or rather simplify what cdogg wrote, IMO the VERY best thing about Duran, and what makes him arguably the GOAT was his ability to seamlessly blend offense and defense.

Like no one else in boxing history to be honest. Sure there are some fighters with amazing defense like Floyd, but they don't exhibit that defense while steaming forward and putting pressure on their opponent. There are fighters with great offense and defense, but implemented seperately, not combined seamlessly as Duran did.

It's nigh on impossible, that's why he's unique in that regard. He had the same sort of offensive pressure and ferocity as Pacquiao, but with amazing defense to go with it, and infighting.

Pacquiao has actually been implementing Duran's walk forward slip and counter, only nowhere near as well.

Even in the 15th round of the first Leonard fight, Duran was slipping ENTIRE combos from someone as fast and accurate as Leonard.

To put it simply, he had the best combination of offense and defense in boxing history, incredibly well rounded fighter, hugely skilled and talented, very tough, and also had some of the best stamina in boxing history.

 

I'd suggest the fights against Hearns or Joppy. If you don't see the greatness, I guess it just isn't there

 

:giggle:

 

Spot on.

 

Also, don't let it fool you if this super-offense looks as if he was just rushing in head first, grabbing continuously and throwing from clinch, rabbit punching, butting, pushing with forearms and going low. It might look that way, but let me tell you, that is some technique right there. And if this super-defense seems like clinching and ducking low when close, remember that it is the unique skill:rock1: