If Pernell would have had KO power.....

He'd be the same bitch that he always was. Whitaker is one guy I never got and anyone who likes him, I question whether they really like boxing. No fighter, none, has ever had more false things said about him that are positive save for maybe Roberto Duran which are obviously not true. All you need to know about Pea is what he says about himself. "I went in there not to get hit." Do some research and this quote or a reasonable facsimile will come out of his mouth.

I hear people talk about how he stood in front of people and made THEM miss.While certainly this is true in terms of seconds and possible true in nearly every prize fight, it is moronic that he did this most or even a quarter of the tme. Whitaker employed some running(defined as completely uncombative behavior.) mostly strategic movement, moving his feet (which is legal) and excessive holding on the Ruiz, Hatton , Duran level. This is never discussed even though it could be tested scientifically. If Pea wasn't running, he was moving, or he was holding and landing a few shots. He had the worst style in history.He should be maligned like John Ruiz. (PLEASE SPARE ME,I AM not comparing their respective talent)He had the style that is the antithesis of what fans want. Boxing is violent. A bullied child can defend himself. It is funny to me that Chris Byrd was hated, yet he really was what people said Pernell was without the illegal style.

 

Or you could factor in the fact that Duran wasn't a dedicated athlete and damaged his own legacy by being in poor physical shape 25-30% of the time once he moved above 147.

Or factor in the dismal mental make-up that allowed him to turn his back and quit against Leonard.

When I rank Duran's all-time greatness I just can't get past the fact that his lack of discipline allowed him to turn in absolute turd performances against Leonard, Benitez and Laing while he should have been peaking from an age standpoint.

 

I hated Pea then alot like I do Floyd now. But you cannot deny the greatness of them both

 

agREED. While Duran was moving up in weight, his reason for poor performances at this stage of his career was more about his fight preparation (or lack thereof) than anything else. It's not like he suddenly got old right after turning in the best and most significant performance of his career.

 

duran was excellent at his best but his myopic fans want to sweep his losses under the rug.

 

None of that was central to the point, I just thought it helped illustrate it.

 

He never lost. Our faith was just tested.

 

:bow:

 

Leonard was Duran's biggest win. Credit to him for that. But he lost the rematch. He was also dominant at Lightweight. But at lightweight he didn't have any elite fighters to face.

The Elite guys he faced were Hearns, Hagler, Leonard and Benitez. He lost to all of them. Size or not. Age or not. He also lost to Sims and Laing when he was still relatively young.

Great Great Fighter....but no argument to be made for him being the GOAT.

Sorry.

 

What's especially funny about this is you will try to make a case for Mayweather as the GOAT.

Typical Stafford...no middle ground and all exaggeration....and only looking at the tip of the iceberg and ignoring the rest.

 

:laugh11:

 

Except for Buchanan and DeJesus, both were fantastic lightweights. WHat's the matter with you?

 

Those fights took place before 1996....that is what is the matter.

 

I just don't understand it. I'm not a Duran fan, really. He wouldn't make a top 30 list of my favorites to watch but he was an awesome fighter. Especially at 135.

 

circular reasoning. They are only mentioned because they were duran'S biggest lightweight fights. They are not part of the elite with guys like Hearns, Leonard, benitez, hagler etc...

 

That's retarded

They are considered great lightweights because they were, by themselves, wonderful fighters.

This is like saying Hearns is only good to make Leonard and Hagler look better. It's absurd.

 

Dude...Trust me, Stafford doesn't know the first thing about Buchanan and DeJesus.

As for the rest of what he is blathering on about, keep in mind that he once said Mayweather vs DLH = Leonard vs Hagler.

He will say ANYTHING in the attempt to "prove" a point or to get the last word.

 

Nah. Hearns proved himself outside of Leonard. He fucked up Duran, beat Benitez, beat that once dominant Welterweight, beat Hill in his older years.

Bad analogy. Hearns stands on his own.

Buchanan and DeJesus, in isolation, mean nothing.

 

100% nonsense

 

Buchanan was a fantastic fighter. I'm pretty indifferent when it comes to Duran, but that should rightly be heralded as a great win.

 

I would hazard a guess that Sly probably hasn't seen DeJesus or Buchanan.

 

I'd heavily favour De Jesus & Buchanan to beat Castillo & Corrales

 

I have always been a huge Chico fan, and I like Castillo too, but I agree with you. DeJesus and Buchanan were brilliant lightweights, very skilled and solid. Undoubtedly both elite fighters, even more so by today's standards.

 

Likewise

 

I'd like to hear Sly's opinion on these match-ups.

 

Any one of a number of forum members could accurately quote his predictions before he even makes them.

 

:bears:

 

::

 

Zab is no pea...pea with even Less power would still whip Zab! Different class of fighter