Who am I to disagree with the GOAT of Lightweights?

This is a quote from the great, Roberto Duran;


Floyd Mayweather would have been 'just another guy' in my era, says Roberto Duran

Duran, who fought in a weight range in the '80s that included Sugar Ray Leonard, Tommy Hearns, Marvin Hagler, and Wilfred Benitez, recently classified Mayweather as "just another guy in the bunch" had Mayweather competed in that same span of time.

"The problem right now is that Mayweather is fighting in an era where there are no real boxers," Duran said. "We knew that kind of style, we were familiar with it. We were used to fighting those kind of boxers."

In a prior interview, Duran also offered Saul Alvarez, who will be fighting Mayweather on September 14, some personal advice on how to handle a fighter like Mayweather.
"If I was going up against a boxer like that, I would bust him up. I would bust him all over the place...the arms, the ribs. The first thing you have to do is forget about the head. The head is smaller than the body. You have to break a man down, and in order to do so you're going to hit him in the kidneys and he'll slowly begin to stop [his movement] and after four rounds he will no longer be able to walk," Duran said.

i think this is a stupid comment(s) by duran. Floyd would be an average fighter in his era? cmon now, sure he wouldnt be undefeated but to say he'd be limited to essentially a gate keeper is a bit of a stretch. frankly, i dont know if duran would be a sure thing to beat floyd himself, never mind all of the other top guys in his era. floyds talented enough to where he would have done pretty well in any era, sure he may not have been the p4p #1 but to say he wouldnt be a top fighter is pretty ridiculous to me.

to a certain degree ill agree with both BG and duran.first duran is correct on how to fight Floyd.the Floyd at lets say 135 that moved a bit.at 135 duran was at his peak and some claim Floyd was at his best at 135 for the 4 fights he had at that weight and one of thoses he lost but got a descion.theres no doubt in my mind duran wins big.none.i agree with BG and have posted here a few times that Floyd in most eras would of been a top fighter and perhaps a champ briefly in a few eras.he would of been a top fighter for a few years 3 years perhaps then the downfall..why.first duran is totally correct on the fighters of his era and before compared to this era.2.there was several in each era plenty of complete fighters.the skill level over the years has gone down a ton.a ton.3.floyd would not be able to handle the fight schudle thoses eras had and compete several times a year against top fighters with fantastic skill.you could not cherry pick or retire briefly to avoid fighters at there peak.it didn't work that way..4.one title per division half as many divisions created a hunger a real hunger and determination that does not exist today.
yes duran hearns leanard haggler are great magical names but there were several good very good fighters in that era also that were on top for 3 years or so disappeared and new ones took there place.
the fight schudle at times got hectic because if you wanted a real title shot you had to fight often against top fighters.no jocking around for a phoney title with as many as 7 or 8 in a division if you count the 4 or so commissions with super champ inter champ reg champ etc etc.
durans era wasn't alone either.robinson basilio gavilyn tony demarco saxton are a few welter champs from another era.contenders galor like gil turner billy graham isac logart etc etc .welters fought middles often.top middles.and were not talking a alvarez either.
Floyd yes has earned the right to be called great.his era realy lacks a lot in skill level though...
duran is correct in his era or another era like I mentioned Floyd would of been just another one of the guys.one of the very good guys for a while.maybe that's what duran ment..

maybe just another guy in his era means that he wouldnt be known as what he is known as today. if he really fought during that era, i dont think he beats any of those fighters that duran stated. i think that benitez would be a toss up but in no way a for sure or easy win. maybe floyd beats duran but not likely. haglar is obviously too big. i can in no way see him beating leonard or hearns. both styles are just wrong for him.

so if duran is inferring that floyd would be an average fighter in that era then i would disagree. but, if he is inferring that floyd would just blend in with the other great fighters of that era then i agree. floyd is great and is beating all of these fighters now and is the cash cow in boxing. in that era, he wouldnt be the cash cow because he would be a few spots down on the p4p list. so maybe the nickname money would have never been invented.

dmar5143 wrote:to a certain degree ill agree with both BG and duran.first duran is correct on how to fight Floyd.the Floyd at lets say 135 that moved a bit.at 135 duran was at his peak and some claim Floyd was at his best at 135 for the 4 fights he had  at that weight and one of thoses he lost but got a descion.theres no doubt in my mind duran wins big.none.i agree with BG and have posted here a few times that Floyd in most eras would of been a top fighter and perhaps a champ briefly in a few eras.he would of been a top fighter for a few years 3 years perhaps then the downfall..why.first duran is totally correct on the fighters of his era and before compared to this era.2.there was several in each era plenty of complete fighters.the skill level over the years has gone down a ton.a ton.3.floyd would not be able to handle the fight schudle thoses eras had and compete several times a year against top fighters with fantastic skill.you could not cherry pick or retire briefly to avoid fighters at there peak.it didn't work that way..4.one title per division half as many divisions created a hunger a real hunger and determination that does not exist today.
yes duran hearns leanard haggler are great magical names but there were several good very good fighters in that era also that were on top for 3 years or so disappeared and new ones took there place.
the fight schudle at times got hectic because if you wanted a real title shot you had to fight often against top fighters.no jocking around for a phoney title with as many as 7 or 8 in a division if you count the 4 or so commissions with super champ inter champ reg champ etc etc.
durans era wasn't alone either.robinson basilio gavilyn tony demarco saxton are a few welter champs from another era.contenders galor like gil turner billy graham isac logart etc etc  .welters fought middles often.top middles.and were not talking a alvarez either.
Floyd yes has earned the right to be called great.his era realy lacks a lot in skill level though...
duran is  correct in his era or another era like I mentioned Floyd would of been just another one of the guys.one of the very good guys for a while.maybe that's what duran ment..

Unless you were Ray Leonard who fought who he wanted, when he wanted, for what money he dictated and all under his terms.  Mike Trainer was a hell of a lawyer.

BoxingGenius wrote:i think this is a stupid comment(s) by duran. Floyd would be an average fighter in his era? cmon now, sure he wouldnt be undefeated but to say he'd be limited to essentially a gate keeper is a bit of a stretch.  frankly, i dont know if duran would be a sure thing to beat floyd himself, never mind all of the other top guys in his era.  floyds talented enough to where he would have done pretty well in any era, sure he may not have been the p4p #1 but to say he wouldnt be a top fighter is pretty ridiculous to me.

BG, we all know that Floyd is a special fighter. I'm just busting balls because I think he's going to win his next fight pretty easy. However, if Floyd ever went into the ring against a prime Duran, he would never have needed a barber to cut all his hair off.

Also, and I'm just guessing here, but I think that the failure of Mayweather and Pacquiao to orchestrate a fight has frustrated many a boxing legend. If they still have their facilities, I have to think they're very loyal boxing fans. Mike Tyson once said he wanted to put Manny and Floyd in jail until they fought each other. Duran probably shares that frustration as well. As I said, I'm guessing here.

However, let's be fair here. Though Duran's era was much more competitive than the present era, it's normal for champions of other times to be harsh in their judgement of present day champs. Joe Louis predicted Ali would lose every big fight he had. I don't think Jack Johnson was too fond of Joe Louis. Also, Muhammad Ali stated that in his prime, Holmes is his sparring partner. Sugar Ray Robinson and his fans were extremely insulted that Ray Leonard's nickname was "Sugar." There are no athletes more competitive than boxing champs and they fight for the rest of their lives, whether they're in or out of the ring.

That said, it should be noted that Duran was one of the FEW champions that had the respect of the gym rats during his prime. I specifically recall older ring experts that saw people like Ike Williams, Benny Leonard and Henry Armstrong state that Duran was the greatest lightweight they had ever seen.

So yes, I can believe that Mayweather would've been competitive in any era, but please don't ask me to believe he would've beaten Roberto Duran.

Frank wrote:

BoxingGenius wrote:i think this is a stupid comment(s) by duran. Floyd would be an average fighter in his era? cmon now, sure he wouldnt be undefeated but to say he'd be limited to essentially a gate keeper is a bit of a stretch.  frankly, i dont know if duran would be a sure thing to beat floyd himself, never mind all of the other top guys in his era.  floyds talented enough to where he would have done pretty well in any era, sure he may not have been the p4p #1 but to say he wouldnt be a top fighter is pretty ridiculous to me.

BG, we all know that Floyd is a special fighter. I'm just busting balls because I think he's going to win his next fight pretty easy. However, if Floyd ever went into the ring against a prime Duran, he would never have needed a barber to cut all his hair off.

Also, and I'm just guessing here, but I think that the failure of Mayweather and Pacquiao to orchestrate a fight has frustrated many a boxing legend. If they still have their facilities, I have to think they're very loyal boxing fans. Mike Tyson once said he wanted to put Manny and Floyd in jail until they fought each other. Duran probably shares that frustration as well. As I said, I'm guessing here.

However, let's be fair here. Though Duran's era was much more competitive than the present era, it's normal for champions of other times to be harsh in their judgement of present day champs. Joe Louis predicted Ali would lose every big fight he had. I don't think Jack Johnson was too fond of Joe Louis. Also, Muhammad Ali stated that in his prime, Holmes is his sparring partner. Sugar Ray Robinson and his fans were extremely insulted that Ray Leonard's nickname was "Sugar."  There are no athletes more competitive than boxing champs and they fight for the rest of their lives, whether they're in or out of the ring.

That said, it should be noted that Duran was one of the FEW champions that had the respect of the gym rats during his prime. I specifically recall older ring experts that saw people like Ike Williams, Benny Leonard and Henry Armstrong state that Duran was the greatest lightweight they had ever seen.

So yes, I can believe that Mayweather would've been competitive in any era, but please don't ask me to believe he would've beaten Roberto Duran.

im not saying he'd beat duran by any means, im just saying i dont think he'd look foolish and out of his league against him either. durans description on how to beat floyd has been the "blueprint" to beat him since JLC yet it never seems to work. duran would be able to execute this strategy better than anyone im sure, and would probably wear floyd down for a stoppage id think. but itd be a competitive fight at least. i mean i cant see him getting blasted out in like 3 rounds or anything. floyds ability to catch punches is up there with anyone, and his shoulder roll is tough to crack with anything short of a great jab or constant flurries. duran could do that, but i think it takes several rounds to break him down. if we are talking a prime floyd, his hand and foot speed are outstanding, he could probably run around for 12 rounds and pot shot enough to win a couple. obviously durans era is head and shoulders above floyds, and a lot of other champs now wouldnt have gotten a whiff of a title back then, but floyd is THE top guy right now, so id have to agree with dmar and say he could probably have held a title for at least a short period. for whatever reason, i never liked duran he was always just 1 of those guys that rubbed me the wrong way. so when he says something like this i cant help but jump down his throat.

BoxingGenius wrote:

Frank wrote:

BoxingGenius wrote:i think this is a stupid comment(s) by duran. Floyd would be an average fighter in his era? cmon now, sure he wouldnt be undefeated but to say he'd be limited to essentially a gate keeper is a bit of a stretch.  frankly, i dont know if duran would be a sure thing to beat floyd himself, never mind all of the other top guys in his era.  floyds talented enough to where he would have done pretty well in any era, sure he may not have been the p4p #1 but to say he wouldnt be a top fighter is pretty ridiculous to me.

BG, we all know that Floyd is a special fighter. I'm just busting balls because I think he's going to win his next fight pretty easy. However, if Floyd ever went into the ring against a prime Duran, he would never have needed a barber to cut all his hair off.

Also, and I'm just guessing here, but I think that the failure of Mayweather and Pacquiao to orchestrate a fight has frustrated many a boxing legend. If they still have their facilities, I have to think they're very loyal boxing fans. Mike Tyson once said he wanted to put Manny and Floyd in jail until they fought each other. Duran probably shares that frustration as well. As I said, I'm guessing here.

However, let's be fair here. Though Duran's era was much more competitive than the present era, it's normal for champions of other times to be harsh in their judgement of present day champs. Joe Louis predicted Ali would lose every big fight he had. I don't think Jack Johnson was too fond of Joe Louis. Also, Muhammad Ali stated that in his prime, Holmes is his sparring partner. Sugar Ray Robinson and his fans were extremely insulted that Ray Leonard's nickname was "Sugar."  There are no athletes more competitive than boxing champs and they fight for the rest of their lives, whether they're in or out of the ring.

That said, it should be noted that Duran was one of the FEW champions that had the respect of the gym rats during his prime. I specifically recall older ring experts that saw people like Ike Williams, Benny Leonard and Henry Armstrong state that Duran was the greatest lightweight they had ever seen.

So yes, I can believe that Mayweather would've been competitive in any era, but please don't ask me to believe he would've beaten Roberto Duran.

im not saying he'd beat duran by any means, im just saying i dont think he'd look foolish and out of his league against him either.  durans description on how to beat floyd has been the "blueprint" to beat him since JLC yet it never seems to work.  duran would be able to execute this strategy better than anyone im sure, and would probably wear floyd down for a stoppage id think. but itd be a competitive fight at least.  i mean i cant see him getting blasted out in like 3 rounds or anything.  floyds ability to catch punches is up there with anyone, and his shoulder roll is tough to crack with anything short of a great jab or constant flurries.  duran could do that, but i think it takes several rounds to break him down.  if we are talking a prime floyd, his hand and foot speed are outstanding, he could probably run around for 12 rounds and pot shot enough to win a couple.  obviously durans era is head and shoulders above floyds, and a lot of other champs now wouldnt have gotten a whiff of a title back then, but floyd is THE top guy right now, so id have to agree with dmar and say he could probably have held a title for at least a short period.  for whatever reason, i never liked duran he was always just 1 of those guys that rubbed me the wrong way.  so when he says something like this i cant help but jump down his throat.  

I agree with this whole post.

im of the opinion that duran just beat leonard in their first fight. yes, leonard could have fought a bit differently, but i think that the excuse that leonard went in their trying to fight durans fight is over used. i thought that it was a competitive fight but duran forced the action and made leonard fight that fight. and unlike most opinion, i didnt think that duran was getting destroyed in their second fight. yes, leonard was clowning around but it was still a semi competitive fight. and i do believe that duran really wasnt prepared like he should have been.

the reason i bring this up is that i believe that leonard is just a naturally bigger and better version of floyd. i think that floyds only real advantage over leonard is his defense and maybe his stamina. leonard is lightning fast and can throw super fast flurries and has great pop on his punches. his foot work is also great.

again, to make my point, thats why i dont see floyd beating duran. i cant really see floyd pop shotting duran to a decision. he may win some rounds like that but i unlike leonard, he couldnt risk going toe to toe with him. i mean, i guess benitez fought a great defensive fight against duran but he fought perfectly and it was still a close fight. so i just dont see floyd winning unless he could do what benitez did and use superb defense and get his shots off perfectly.

so floyd has a chance but i would in no way pick him to beat duran.

duran would have knocked his narrow ass out.