Great Fighters beaten by a Journeyman when in their prime.

[sonnyboyx2]

Duran wasn't even particularly close to his prime by that stage. That's a textbook example of a once great fighter not in his prime anymore.

Lewis is a good one except McCall was hardly a journeyman. A championship caliber fighter is, by definition, not a journeyman.

i cannot agree with you here. claiming "Duran wasn't even particularly close to his prime".....Roberto Duran the legend that he is fought professional for over 33yrs which is incredible. He fought for 19yrs after losing to Kirkland Laing winning 2 legitimate World Titles... fighting Cuevas, Hagler, Hearns, Leonard and many many other Class A fighters..i don't agree with you.

McCall was not a championship caliber fighter. in fact i would say Kirkland Laing was vastly superior in almost every aspect of the sport than what Oliver McCall was. McCall had been beaten very easily by Mike "Bounty" Hunter, Buster Douglas, Orlin Norris & Tony Tucker who was a `shot fighter` at that time... Hunter & Norris were cruiserweights. If Lewis is as great as many claim him to be, then he should not have lost to McCall.. Duran was almost `schooled` by Laing, although it was a split verdict, it was clear Laing was the worthy winner.

[BKM-2010]

Come on man...he was 30 years old, had nearly 50 fights, had been a pro for about ten years and had spent 4 years as a champion with many defenses and champions beaten when he last lost. That is as prime as it gets. In fact, he wasn't just in his prime, he was a long time, battle tested veteran champion of the sport. Unless of course we're now calling 30 year old, decade long world champion pros of 50 fights green and inexperienced?

That excuse is the most overused and utterly absurd one of all the excuses Wlad fans pull out. "He wasn't in his prime though"

So his prime was conveniently only when he didn't lose? According to those guys, his prime just happened to start in the fight directly after his last loss and has lasted to now...though his next loss he'll be suddenly out of his prime.

Hey, that's all fine since it's not my main point. My whole point is that at the time of the losses, Wladimir was not a great fighter. Even now in 2015 his best wins are against Chris Byrd, a man several weight classes below him.

If Alex Leapai had managed to beat Klitschko, I still would not list that win in this thread.

[#1Assassin]

vernon forrest against sergio mora. you could argue he was slightly past his best at the time (imo he was), but its not like he fell off or anything. he was still very close to his best.

arguello against vilomar fernandez is a good example too. arguello lost a few earlier in his career but this was after he made several defenses of the title and went on a huge streak. fernandez fought plenty of great fighter but generally came up short. pretty sure the first fight with arguello was the only exception.

[BennyST]

i cannot agree with you here. claiming "Duran wasn't even particularly close to his prime".....Roberto Duran the legend that he is fought professional for over 33yrs which is incredible. He fought for 19yrs after losing to Kirkland Laing winning 2 legitimate World Titles... fighting Cuevas, Hagler, Hearns, Leonard and many many other Class A fighters..i don't agree with you.

McCall was not a championship caliber fighter. in fact i would say Kirkland Laing was vastly superior in almost every aspect of the sport than what Oliver McCall was. McCall had been beaten very easily by Mike "Bounty" Hunter, Buster Douglas, Orlin Norris & Tony Tucker who was a `shot fighter` at that time... Hunter & Norris were cruiserweights. If Lewis is as great as many claim him to be, then he should not have lost to McCall.. Duran was almost `schooled` by Laing, although it was a split verdict, it was clear Laing was the worthy winner.

McCall was a champion. He beat world champions. I realise you struggle to understand basic concepts and you're a little slow on the uptake, but if a fighter is a world champion, beats world champions and fights at the top championship level...he is by the very definition of the statement, a championship quality fighter and not a journeyman. A championship quality fighter is someone who has the qualities to become a world champion. McCall became a world champion by beating a world champion. McCall was a world champion, therefore possessed the quality to become so, which literally defines him as a championship quality fighter. Understand? Get it? Comprende?

As for Duran...Boy oh boy... Fighting on until he was 50 or whatever makes literally no difference as to when his actual proper prime was. He had some good years after and some bad, but he was never close to the fighter he was as a lightweight/welterweight from 154 and up. It's just basic boxing mate. Use your minimal comprehension skills, and just watch the damn guy. He had a few good fights he was obviously trained on more than beer and food, but they were few and far between and was largely fat and lazy.

If you can't see that he was already a shell of his former self, particularly in that fight, no matter how much longer he fought on (which just means absolutely nothing anyway) then you are truly a bigger moron than anyone here gives you credit for...and that is a very difficult thing to do considering.

It still took a great effort from a good fighter who never reached his potential to beat even that version of him, but if you think that is a prime Duran...just...wow. What's next, Roy Jones is still in his prime?

[BennyST]

Hey, that's all fine since it's not my main point. My whole point is that at the time of the losses, Wladimir was not a great fighter. Even now in 2015 his best wins are against Chris Byrd, a man several weight classes below him.

If Alex Leapai had managed to beat Klitschko, I still would not list that win in this thread.

Right. Gotcha.

vernon forrest against sergio mora. you could argue he was slightly past his best at the time (imo he was), but its not like he fell off or anything. he was still very close to his best.

arguello against vilomar fernandez is a good example too. arguello lost a few earlier in his career but this was after he made several defenses of the title and went on a huge streak. fernandez fought plenty of great fighter but generally came up short. pretty sure the first fight with arguello was the only exception.

Fernandez was a very tricky little fighter. The type of guy that today would be a constant second tier champion...Malignaggi like fighter, at his best he was better than Paulie, but you know what i mean.

[young_robbed]

LOL...

No way was Duran anywhere near his best against Kirkland Laing.. Seriously??

he was still a good fighter at that point, but he wasn't really in shape, 154 was never Duran's ideal weight class, this is also true for the Benitez fight. The few times he turned up in shape at 154 was maybe against Davey Moore, (he was on point for that fight) Minchillo and Cuevas. Duran's TRUE prime for me was when he was at lightweight.. He was a much more destructive puncher at that weight class. I know people often point to the first Leonard or Palomino fight for Duran's prime, but I disagree. His power wasn't as devastating at welter compared to lightweight. He wasn't as quick or vicious at those weight classes. These are facts.

[sonnyboyx2]

McCall was a champion. He beat world champions. I realise you struggle to understand basic concepts and you're a little slow on the uptake, but if a fighter is a world champion, beats world champions and fights at the top championship level...he is by the very definition of the statement, a championship quality fighter and not a journeyman. A championship quality fighter is someone who has the qualities to become a world champion. McCall became a world champion by beating a world champion. McCall was a world champion, therefore possessed the quality to become so, which literally defines him as a championship quality fighter. Understand? Get it? Comprende?

As for Duran...Boy oh boy... Fighting on until he was 50 or whatever makes literally no difference as to when his actual proper prime was. He had some good years after and some bad, but he was never close to the fighter he was as a lightweight/welterweight from 154 and up. It's just basic boxing mate. Use your minimal comprehension skills, and just watch the damn guy. He had a few good fights he was obviously trained on more than beer and food, but they were few and far between and was largely fat and lazy.

If you can't see that he was already a shell of his former self, particularly in that fight, no matter how much longer he fought on (which just means absolutely nothing anyway) then you are truly a bigger moron than anyone here gives you credit for...and that is a very difficult thing to do considering.

It still took a great effort from a good fighter who never reached his potential to beat even that version of him, but if you think that is a prime Duran...just...wow. What's next, Roy Jones is still in his prime?

Which World Champions did McCall beat??? .. McCall beat Lennox Lewis who had taken a belt out of a trash bin.

Each time McCall ever fought a name opponent or an opponent ranked in the world top 30 he was defeated by them..

Roberto Duran was more or less in his prime when defeated by Kirkland Laing in 1983... no matter how you try to spin it your way, it is clear that many of his greatest performances were ahead of the Laing defeat.. Duran won the Light-Middle belt from Davey Moore, defeated Pipino Cuevas, was edged out of the decision by Marvin Hagler, put on a masterclass to defeat Iran Barkley.. Get a ****ing grip man and stop talking shyte.

[sonnyboyx2]

LOL...

No way was Duran anywhere near his best against Kirkland Laing.. Seriously??

he was still a good fighter at that point, but he wasn't really in shape, 154 was never Duran's ideal weight class, this is also true for the Benitez fight. The few times he turned up in shape at 154 was maybe against Davey Moore, (he was on point for that fight) Minchillo and Cuevas. Duran's TRUE prime for me was when he was at lightweight.. He was a much more destructive puncher at that weight class. I know people often point to the first Leonard or Palomino fight for Duran's prime, but I disagree. His power wasn't as devastating at welter compared to lightweight. He wasn't as quick or vicious at those weight classes. These are facts.

his quality of opponent was after Laing

[young_robbed]

his quality of opponent was after Laing

?????????????????????

[sonnyboyx2]

Cuevas, Moore, Hagler, Leonard, Hearns, Barkley, Sims.... All excellent quality opponents who Duran fought and fought well against. Duran had been a pro boxer 8yrs when he fought Kirkland Laing and lost. He then fought for another 19yrs.. Duran was over-the-hill when he fought Pazienza, Castro, Camacho, Joppy but he was nowhere near over-the-hill in 1982 when losing to Laing a defeat which was only 18 months after his greatest ever career performance beating Ray Leonard in Montreal.