Been reading about Duran a little bit more, and he’s one of my favorites. The guy was a fucking beast, a legend, and a killer.
So who do you think wins, most likely at LW- Roberto Duran, or Floyd Mayweather?
Duran.
I would like to say Duran and I think he was the better fighter overall (the best LW ever maybe).
However in a match one against another, I’d have to go with Floyd.
He’s a pretty bad matchup for Duran and should be able to weather the storm and frustrate Roberto in the latest rounds.
at 135 probably Duran, dude was an animal
Duran was something very special indeed, he always fought the best cause he was the best. As much as i respect mayweather his defensive style wouldnt make it a classic.
Mayweather would be the more skilled fighter of the two, I pretend Duran would edge it unrelenting ferocity.
I remember Freddie Roach being asked about the outcome of a Duran/Pacman dream fight
He said Duran.
I think Duran would beat him. Like the first Leonard Duran fight, but uglier since Floyd isn’t as good as SRL.
But what a bruising matchup it would be…
[quote]furrball wrote:
Duran was something very special indeed, he always fought the best cause he was the best. As much as i respect mayweather his defensive style wouldnt make it a classic.
Mayweather would be the more skilled fighter of the two, I pretend Duran would edge it unrelenting ferocity.
I remember Freddie Roach being asked about the outcome of a Duran/Pacman dream fight
He said Duran.[/quote]
He later changed his mind and said Pacquiao 
I don’t know man. You can’t hit what you can’t catch. I could easily see Mayweather frustrating Duran into submission, a la Sugar Ray.
Oh yeah, I remember my dad telling me stories about how when Duran was little running the streets of Panama, him and his buddies would take turns hitting eachother in the head with bricks to make eachother tougher. I have no idea if that really happened, but if it did that’s hardcore.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
I don’t know man. You can’t hit what you can’t catch. I could easily see Mayweather frustrating Duran into submission, a la Sugar Ray.[/quote]
That was different. That was humiliation. Duran was embarrassed about watching that big wind-up punch and getting tagged in the face etc.
It would be a match worth watching. I don’t think I could pick a winner.
I do think that Hagler, Hearns and Leonard would have beaten him though.
[quote]duffyj2 wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
I don’t know man. You can’t hit what you can’t catch. I could easily see Mayweather frustrating Duran into submission, a la Sugar Ray.[/quote]
That was different. That was humiliation. Duran was embarrassed about watching that big wind-up punch and getting tagged in the face etc.
It would be a match worth watching. I don’t think I could pick a winner.
I do think that Hagler, Hearns and Leonard would have beaten him though. [/quote]
Duran’s people say that he felt like Sugar Ray was more interested in running away and dancing than fighting and Duran just got frustrated and quit. I’m not gonna say Mayweather is the best of all-time, but I feel like he doesn’t get the respect he deserves in the “all-time” discussions. The guy is an amazing fighter, and I think he’ll be more respected when he’s been out of the ring for a few years.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]duffyj2 wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
I don’t know man. You can’t hit what you can’t catch. I could easily see Mayweather frustrating Duran into submission, a la Sugar Ray.[/quote]
That was different. That was humiliation. Duran was embarrassed about watching that big wind-up punch and getting tagged in the face etc.
It would be a match worth watching. I don’t think I could pick a winner.
I do think that Hagler, Hearns and Leonard would have beaten him though. [/quote]
Duran’s people say that he felt like Sugar Ray was more interested in running away and dancing than fighting and Duran just got frustrated and quit. I’m not gonna say Mayweather is the best of all-time, but I feel like he doesn’t get the respect he deserves in the “all-time” discussions. The guy is an amazing fighter, and I think he’ll be more respected when he’s been out of the ring for a few years.[/quote]
That was Duran’s story afterward. The reason has never been really clear. But here’s a quote form his manager Carlos Eleta - “Durán didn’t quit because of stomach cramps. He quit because he was embarrassed. I know this.”
Anyway Mayweather isn’t in to that showboating style. And he doesn’t run away. He sits in the pocket and counters. So it would be a different fight.
Mayweather is definately talented. And the fact that we are debating this at all shows the his abilities are very respected. But he will not punching into the “best of all time” lists, simply because he did not fight the best of opposition that was out there. And that’s what it’s all about.
^^^ It’s not like he’s fought nothing but cans. I really don’t like the “different era” arguement. People said the same thing about RJJ. I do agree that fighters of yesteryear had much tougher opposition, but I don’t think fighters of today can/should be penalized for it. And, with todays advances in training/nutrition whose to say that those fighters could match up with todays fighters? I’m just playing devil’s advocate here.
Mayweather will win. Mayweather is still young, but Duran is 59 years old.
Unless he teams up with Rocky Balboa in training camp, and train the house down in some montage scenes.
^Hardee Har
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
^^^ It’s not like he’s fought nothing but cans. I really don’t like the “different era” arguement. People said the same thing about RJJ. I do agree that fighters of yesteryear had much tougher opposition, but I don’t think fighters of today can/should be penalized for it. And, with todays advances in training/nutrition whose to say that those fighters could match up with todays fighters? I’m just playing devil’s advocate here.[/quote]
It isn’t the different era argument. In fact, for his weight class, it would be considered quite a good era. If, upon retirement, his hit-list read with names like Pacman, Cotto, Margarito, Williams, Bradley, Alexander and Khan (in their primes), he would be crowned one of the greatest of all time. Heck, even if he had some difficult fights, even if he had some losses (not every fighter is going to suit your style) people would give him credit.
In the end, no-one can make a definitive statement about who wins which fictional match-up. But the only way we can judge fighters is on their fights. And if you don’t spend what short time you have dispatching the best, then prepare to be overlooked in the book of the best.
[quote]duffyj2 wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
^^^ It’s not like he’s fought nothing but cans. I really don’t like the “different era” arguement. People said the same thing about RJJ. I do agree that fighters of yesteryear had much tougher opposition, but I don’t think fighters of today can/should be penalized for it. And, with todays advances in training/nutrition whose to say that those fighters could match up with todays fighters? I’m just playing devil’s advocate here.[/quote]
It isn’t the different era argument. In fact, for his weight class, it would be considered quite a good era. If, upon retirement, his hit-list read with names like Pacman, Cotto, Margarito, Williams, Bradley, Alexander and Khan (in their primes), he would be crowned one of the greatest of all time. Heck, even if he had some difficult fights, even if he had some losses (not every fighter is going to suit your style) people would give him credit.
In the end, no-one can make a definitive statement about who wins which fictional match-up. But the only way we can judge fighters is on their fights. And if you don’t spend what short time you have dispatching the best, then prepare to be overlooked in the book of the best. [/quote]
Khan? Whuuuttttt?
[quote]sardines12 wrote:
[quote]duffyj2 wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
^^^ It’s not like he’s fought nothing but cans. I really don’t like the “different era” arguement. People said the same thing about RJJ. I do agree that fighters of yesteryear had much tougher opposition, but I don’t think fighters of today can/should be penalized for it. And, with todays advances in training/nutrition whose to say that those fighters could match up with todays fighters? I’m just playing devil’s advocate here.[/quote]
It isn’t the different era argument. In fact, for his weight class, it would be considered quite a good era. If, upon retirement, his hit-list read with names like Pacman, Cotto, Margarito, Williams, Bradley, Alexander and Khan (in their primes), he would be crowned one of the greatest of all time. Heck, even if he had some difficult fights, even if he had some losses (not every fighter is going to suit your style) people would give him credit.
In the end, no-one can make a definitive statement about who wins which fictional match-up. But the only way we can judge fighters is on their fights. And if you don’t spend what short time you have dispatching the best, then prepare to be overlooked in the book of the best. [/quote]
Khan? Whuuuttttt?[/quote]
I’m afraid I was being a bit cheeky with this one. I was laying out a prediction that Khan would (in the future) become a dominant force at 140. And if Mayweather defeated him (again a future fight) it would stand him in good stead. But yeah. Cheeky.
[quote]duffyj2 wrote:
[quote]sardines12 wrote:
[quote]duffyj2 wrote:
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
^^^ It’s not like he’s fought nothing but cans. I really don’t like the “different era” arguement. People said the same thing about RJJ. I do agree that fighters of yesteryear had much tougher opposition, but I don’t think fighters of today can/should be penalized for it. And, with todays advances in training/nutrition whose to say that those fighters could match up with todays fighters? I’m just playing devil’s advocate here.[/quote]
It isn’t the different era argument. In fact, for his weight class, it would be considered quite a good era. If, upon retirement, his hit-list read with names like Pacman, Cotto, Margarito, Williams, Bradley, Alexander and Khan (in their primes), he would be crowned one of the greatest of all time. Heck, even if he had some difficult fights, even if he had some losses (not every fighter is going to suit your style) people would give him credit.
In the end, no-one can make a definitive statement about who wins which fictional match-up. But the only way we can judge fighters is on their fights. And if you don’t spend what short time you have dispatching the best, then prepare to be overlooked in the book of the best. [/quote]
Khan? Whuuuttttt?[/quote]
I’m afraid I was being a bit cheeky with this one. I was laying out a prediction that Khan would (in the future) become a dominant force at 140. And if Mayweather defeated him (again a future fight) it would stand him in good stead. But yeah. Cheeky. [/quote]
hahahahahahhahah. Cheeky? delusional? Maybe.
[quote]duffyj2 wrote:
Anyway Mayweather isn’t in to that showboating style. And he doesn’t run away. He sits in the pocket and counters. So it would be a different fight.
Mayweather is definately talented. And the fact that we are debating this at all shows the his abilities are very respected. But he will not punching into the “best of all time” lists, simply because he did not fight the best of opposition that was out there. And that’s what it’s all about. [/quote]
I agree with a lot of this. I actually don’t think that Mayweather would have sat in the phone booth with Duran- he would have run around alot like he did with DLH.
Sitting in the pocket is what Sugar Ray did in the first fight- and he got his ass kicked. And he was just as fast, and way more powerful, than Mayweather. Especially when he fought Duran at 147… Floyd is a little bit smaller, as SRL never actually fought at lightweight, but Floyd did for a long time.