The REAL Legacy of Roberto Duran

[Dav]

With his impending induction into the International Boxing Hall of Fame, I feel it apt to air my views on where Duran will ultimately be remembered. It is a little unfortunate that Duran's name is inextricably linked these days with Leonard, Hagler and Hearns (due in part to the excellent DVD "The Fabulous Four"). It is understandable then that some may compare the four and look at Duran's performances as being not so great... he lost 2/3 to Leonard, lost to Hagler and got knocked out (in spectacular fashion) by Hearns. His only redemption was in his epic introduction to the 'middle' weight (not middleweight!!) divisions against Ray Leonard in 'The Brawl in Montreal' (still one of the most exciting fights ever IMO!!). What sometimes escapes notice is that when he bagen fighting at welter weight (and higher) Duran was mixing in company 2 weight divisions higher and 10 years after his peak. He is guilty of complicating his legacy even further by going on to win 'world' titles at Junior Middleweight and Middleweight (he claims a 5th weight - Super Middleweight.. but it was only the NBA title he won), and fighting into his 50's (he reamains the only boxer to fight professionally in 5 different decades!!!).

When remembering Roberto Duran I believe ultimately he will be remembered as the number one lightweight of all time.

10 years after his prime was when Duran fought at welterweight? So he was prime in 1969-1970 when he was 18 years old? This is more ridiculous nonsense about Duran. He was prime in about 1977/1978 or so I think which would make 10 years after his prime in 1987-1988.. And he fought Ray in 1980.. And was Ray prime when he fought Duran? No,, not either time, Ray was inexperienced when he fought Duran in 1980 and over the hill when he fought him in 1989..

What I said was Duran should not be remembered for his fihgts with the likes of Leonard, Hagler and Hearns which spanned the years 1980 -1989. Taking my statement that these fights were 10 years past his peak, this means that he was at his best between 1970 and 1979. I didn't mean that he was 10 years past his peak when he first went in with Leonard. Alot of people have only seen Duran on dvds like the Fabulous 4 which, good as that is, gives a false impression of a fighter who should be remembered primarily for his previous work.

[Tito BHB]

In my opinion although he was not young and at his peak when he fought his best competition in leonard, hagler and hearns..

He is rightful of his place in the group of four as he was a genuine threat to any of them and he was a veteran and a man fighting rather then a young up coming boy..

His fight with Leonard the first time just shows how great he was in his prime..

His fight with hearns is just testiment to how good hearns was.. If one thing has been confirmed.. A natural middleweight who had an undoubted solid chin was plain sparked by hearns and that just builds legacy of not only hearns but the fighters of the time..

And having been past his best he still went the distance and fought a great fight against one of the best middleweights in history in hagler..

His great wins over barkley and moore.. The only man to have won titles in five separate decades..

His career prime or not and the fact he has been such a great character in the sport of boxing is why he is a legend..

If he isnt hall of fame material then no one is!

[CutMeMick]

One thing I notice when people speak on Duran is that they only speak on his fights against SRL, Hagler, Hearns.

For the most part on accasion someone will mention the Barkley fight and say he got a gift decision. (Which I find amusing to read that).

People tend to forget his great trilogy with one of Puerto Ricos greatest Esteban De Jesus what a trilogy that was IMO one of the lesser talked about trilogies but boy whas it a good one. Duran came back from an early loss to De Jesus to win the second meeting in which he went down early in the fight. The third fight was a unification bout which Duran also won. You also gotta note his win over the then Lighweight champ. Buchanan who would have been the Undisputed champ. had he kepted his WBC belt when he faced Duran. What about the fight against Moore where he showed what he was made of you gotta mention that....

To me at Lightweight it's Duran then the rest.
In ANY list as far as P4P, all times or whatever it may be in that sense for me Duran comes in at top 5 without a doubt.

[ICB]

One thing I notice when people speak on Duran is that they only speak on his fights against SRL, Hagler, Hearns.

For the most part on accasion someone will mention the Barkley fight and say he got a gift decision. (Which I find amusing to read that).

People tend to forget his great trilogy with one of Puerto Ricos greatest Esteban De Jesus what a trilogy that was IMO one of the lesser talked about trilogies but boy whas it a good one. Duran came back from an early loss to De Jesus to win the second meeting in which he went down early in the fight. The third fight was a unification bout which Duran also won. You also gotta note his win over the then Lighweight champ. Buchanan who would have been the Undisputed champ. had he kepted his WBC belt when he faced Duran. What about the fight against Moore where he showed what he was made of you gotta mention that....

To me at Lightweight it's Duran then the rest.
In ANY list as far as P4P, all times or whatever it may be in that sense for me Duran comes in at top 5 without a doubt.

Can i just ask what your top 10 list would be then ?? because top 5 of all time is way too high for Duran there is much more deserving fighters in top 5 than Duran.

[Dav]

One thing I notice when people speak on Duran is that they only speak on his fights against SRL, Hagler, Hearns.

For the most part on accasion someone will mention the Barkley fight and say he got a gift decision. (Which I find amusing to read that).

People tend to forget his great trilogy with one of Puerto Ricos greatest Esteban De Jesus what a trilogy that was IMO one of the lesser talked about trilogies but boy whas it a good one. Duran came back from an early loss to De Jesus to win the second meeting in which he went down early in the fight. The third fight was a unification bout which Duran also won. You also gotta note his win over the then Lighweight champ. Buchanan who would have been the Undisputed champ. had he kepted his WBC belt when he faced Duran. What about the fight against Moore where he showed what he was made of you gotta mention that....

To me at Lightweight it's Duran then the rest.
In ANY list as far as P4P, all times or whatever it may be in that sense for me Duran comes in at top 5 without a doubt.

Can i just ask what your top 10 list would be then ?? because top 5 of all time is way too high for Duran there is much more deserving fighters in top 5 than Duran.

The Ring magazine didn't think so. When they celebrated their 80th anniversary they published their top 80 P4P fighters during their 80 year run and Duran came 4th, behind (from memory) Robinson, Ali and Armstrong.

[Dav]

I stand corrected... I've just found the magazine in question and Duran was 5th. The top 10 were as follows:

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Muhammad Ali
4. Joe Louis
5. Roberto Duran
6. Willie Pep
7.Harry Greb
8. Benny Leonard
9. Sugar Ray Leonard
10. Pernell Whitaker

Considering the thread of this topic others of note were....

17. Marvin Hagler
67. Thomas Hearns (?)
68. Wilfred Benitez

Pick the bones out of that lot!!

[ICB]

I stand corrected... I've just found the magazine in question and Duran was 5th. The top 10 were as follows:

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Muhammad Ali
4. Joe Louis
5. Roberto Duran
6. Willie Pep
7.Harry Greb
8. Benny Leonard
9. Sugar Ray Leonard
10. Pernell Whitaker

Considering the thread of this topic others of note were....

17. Marvin Hagler
67. Thomas Hearns (?)
68. Wilfred Benitez

Pick the bones out of that lot!!

Willie Pep should be higher than Duran i honestly don't rate Duran as high as that yes he had great reign at Lightweight and imo is probably the best Lightweight ever but when he moved up he lost alot of the big fights and got outboxed by lowely regarded Kirland Laing and Simms yes he is a legend and i like Duran personally but top 5 he should not be imo.

[CutMeMick]

One thing I notice when people speak on Duran is that they only speak on his fights against SRL, Hagler, Hearns.

For the most part on accasion someone will mention the Barkley fight and say he got a gift decision. (Which I find amusing to read that).

People tend to forget his great trilogy with one of Puerto Ricos greatest Esteban De Jesus what a trilogy that was IMO one of the lesser talked about trilogies but boy whas it a good one. Duran came back from an early loss to De Jesus to win the second meeting in which he went down early in the fight. The third fight was a unification bout which Duran also won. You also gotta note his win over the then Lighweight champ. Buchanan who would have been the Undisputed champ. had he kepted his WBC belt when he faced Duran. What about the fight against Moore where he showed what he was made of you gotta mention that....

To me at Lightweight it's Duran then the rest.
In ANY list as far as P4P, all times or whatever it may be in that sense for me Duran comes in at top 5 without a doubt.

Can i just ask what your top 10 list would be then ?? because top 5 of all time is way too high for Duran there is much more deserving fighters in top 5 than Duran.

Def. you can ask... Here it is...

1. SRR
2. Ali
3. Henry
4. Duran
5. Pep

[Dav]

I stand corrected... I've just found the magazine in question and Duran was 5th. The top 10 were as follows:

1. Sugar Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Muhammad Ali
4. Joe Louis
5. Roberto Duran
6. Willie Pep
7.Harry Greb
8. Benny Leonard
9. Sugar Ray Leonard
10. Pernell Whitaker

Considering the thread of this topic others of note were....

17. Marvin Hagler
67. Thomas Hearns (?)
68. Wilfred Benitez

Pick the bones out of that lot!!

Willie Pep should be higher than Duran i honestly don't rate Duran as high as that yes he had great reign at Lightweight and imo is probably the best Lightweight ever but when he moved up he lost alot of the big fights and got outboxed by lowely regarded Kirland Laing and Simms yes he is a legend and i like Duran personally but top 5 he should not be imo.

Yes, the problem with Duran was that he sometimes failed to get into shape for fights and lost some howlers he should have won easily

[LegendBoxing65]

One thing I notice when people speak on Duran is that they only speak on his fights against SRL, Hagler, Hearns.

That is not true since if people are saying he is top 5 p4p ever, then he would not be that with his fights with those guys. So why is he being regarded as top 5 ever? Like someone said earlier. His fights with Buchanan. Dejesus, Viruet and Palomino.. That makes him p4p 5 ever?? That has to be a joke. His lightweight career is good but not great to warrant that. And his reputation carried over where people hoped he would do well against the legends of the 80s. And when he won against Moore and Barkley, people said, wow look how great he is, but when he lost he had excuses. His foot positioning was too wide apart and that was a problem later. When a boxer moved Duran could not be mobile enough to catch him, when he was nailed by fast punchers like Benitez or Hearns he would sit there and take the punch cleanly.. He had his weaknesses. He was a great fighter but not 5 p4p.. If he is 5 p4p he would have beaten Hearns and Hagler and he didn't.. I know someone will say, well he was past his prime and overweight, well if a guy is p4p 5 he should have been able to do the impossible. 5p4p is a high place to be, and not beating them means he does not deserve to be there, not on his lightweight career.

[LegendBoxing65]

I actually think Ray Leonard who had only 40 fights in his career has more of a case for being p4p 5.. He beat betters guys than Duran. Duran fought all the guys Leonard did who were great. Benitez, Hearns, Hagler, but Leonard beat them and Duran did not. Why is Duran even considered as p4p number 5? 5 in the history of boxing for what beating Buchanan and being dominant against guys he should have beaten. Look at the list of guys Chavez fought in the 80s and early 90s. That is just as good as Duran's lightweight list, and Whitaker would have beaten Duran.

[Beanflicker]

Although he lost to the rest of the Fab 4, I think considering the fact that he was originally a LW, what he did was remarkable. He cleary beat Leonard (soemthing Hearns and Hagler were not able to do) and, even though he lost, put up a much more respectable performance against the great Marvin Hagler than both Hearns and Leonard (who ran for 12 rounds)

[yoitsdan]

Duran is the greatest lightweight that ever lived.

[THE THIRD MAN]

Duran won 73 of his first 74 fights with 56 KO's in twelve years of boxing and avenged that only defeat at Lightweight.
His greatest moment was the win against Leonard in 1980 and his lowest 6 months later.
If he had of retired then his legacy was assured, the fact he went on and lost to Hearns, Hagler and a few bums who he would have destroyed in his prime is irrelevant to the fact that Duran has to be included in anyone's Top ten list of all time fighters.
What position he is placed is up to the indiviidual but you can't leave him out.
Duran at his best was a monster!

[LegendBoxing65]

Although he lost to the rest of the Fab 4, I think considering the fact that he was originally a LW, what he did was remarkable. He cleary beat Leonard (soemthing Hearns and Hagler were not able to do) and, even though he lost, put up a much more respectable performance against the great Marvin Hagler than both Hearns and Leonard (who ran for 12 rounds)

What did he do remarkable? He beat Ray when Ray decided to brawl with him, and still Duran could not knockout an inexperienced guy with one title defense at welterweight who was fighting his inside fight. I am amazed at all this talk about Duran. He moved up to welterweight when he was 28 years old.. Something alot of fighters do. He beat Ray Leonard the first time and then Ray beats him the next two times easy. Not just barely but easy, which proves that Ray fought the wrong fight the first time. Duran then loses to Hearns,Hagler,Benitez.. what is remarkable about what he did after lightweight really? Yet when Hearns went up and beat Virgil Hill 30 pounds above where he beat Pipino Cueves, that was not remarkable to most people. and I see Hearns moving up much more impressive than Duran since Hearns beat better guys when he moved up. And Cueves was better than Buchanan was and Virgil had 10 defenses at light heavyweight. I just do not see what was remarkable about losing to all the legends he fought in the 80s.. Had Ray boxed him like he should have Duran would have lost bigtime to all the legends of the 80s.. Look at the scorecards of his fight to Ray in Dec. 1989.