Who is more skilled. Floyd Mayweather or Roberto Duran

[NChristo]

Old fat larry holmes who after getting ko'd managed to nearly beat evander holyfield. Tyson crushed his opponent is far more convincing fashion, that first fight with castillo imo was a robbery.

If Castillo beat Floyd in the first fight then doesn't that make the rematch that much of a better win ?, can either Holmes or Ruddock claim to have a win close too someone like Floyd Mayweather ?, Michael Spinks comes closest if you count the 2nd fight as a win for Holmes but even then Spinks wasn't at his best.

Tyson may have crushed his opponents, where as Floyd didn't have the power or style too 'crush' them he beat them just as impressively as Tyson did in his own way in that he's pretty much controlled every fight and rarely loses rounds.

He didn't 'nearly' beat Holyfield at all, he made Holyfield look sloppy at times and made some rounds competitive but it was Holyfield all the way, Mercer win is impressive but that's all Holmes has after fighting Tyson where as Castillo and Corrales both stayed competitive at a fairly high level.

[Capaedia]

read the post above this reply of your to actually get an idea who Razor Ruddock was. Corrales was nothing like Razor, he didn't have bone crushing power and his skills were so limited.

I know who Ruddock was, but I also know who Corrales was.

He was a big man at the weight, a P4P fighter, betting favourite and he definitely had power.

He also had better wins than Ruddock. Some of these even came after the one-sided beat down by Mayweather

also that old Larry Holmes went 12 competitive rounds with the second greatest heavyweight of this era only a year later in Evander Holyfield and also beat the highly underated rey mercer.

Holmes was competitive with Holyfield because of his jab, only. Holyfield was never in danger of losing anyway.

Ray Mercer fought one of the ******est fights you will ever see, against Holmes. No thought, just straight up following and getting tagged at will.

That's not an impressive win, that's a surprising one. No-one predicted how ball-shiveringly ******ly Mercer would fight Holmes.

Two fights later he would lose to Jesse Ferguson (Who he tried to bribe mid-fight)

that first fight with castillo imo was a robbery.

Then you don't know what a robbery is.

A robbery is when a fight can't go either way. Anyone that argues that that fight could not have gone the other way has an agenda.

You can make an argument for both men deserving the win. That's a close decision.

[WolfGirl]

You are asking people to rate the skills of Duran who hasn't fought in 11 years and wasn't in his prime 22 years. Most people here haven't been following boxing 5 years.
Just saying.

Ya, but several posters already pointed out the fact that a lot of new boxing fans do watch videos of older fighters.
I know a few people who are new to boxing, but their favorite fighters are not current fighters. My cousin is a huge Tyson fan and he has watched every single Tyson fight from his debut to Lewis. My cousin is 19 years old, so he's far removed from the Tyson era. Yet I can pit his Tyson knowledge against almost anyone and he will break down the individual fights along with Tyson's flaws, strengths etc.

We don't have to live in a particular era to have boxing knowledge of fighters from that era.

I know more about Ali and his fighting styles/tactics/techniques more so than I know about Pacquaio.

[kiDynamite92]

I know who Ruddock was, but I also know who Corrales was.

He was a big man at the weight, a P4P fighter, betting favourite and he definitely had power.

He also had better wins than Ruddock. Some of these even came after the one-sided beat down by Mayweather



Holmes was competitive with Holyfield because of his jab, only. Holyfield was never in danger of losing anyway.

Ray Mercer fought one of the ******est fights you will ever see, against Holmes. No thought, just straight up following and getting tagged at will.

That's not an impressive win, that's a surprising one. No-one predicted how ball-shiveringly ******ly Mercer would fight Holmes.

Two fights later he would lose to Jesse Ferguson (Who he tried to bribe mid-fight)



Then you don't know what a robbery is.

A robbery is when a fight can't go either way. Anyone that argues that that fight could not have gone the other way has an agenda.

You can make an argument for both men deserving the win. That's a close decision.

I consider the two wars that Ruddock had with Tyson better than anything Diego Corrales did, including that miraculous win against JLC who he than got Ko'd by in the next fight.

The fact that Holmes was able to give Holyfield as much trouble as he did completely abolishes the theory that he was done, yes he may not have been in his prime (in which he would have beaten both Tyson and Holyfield) but he was still a very good opponent. The way Rey Mercer choose to fight is completely his problem, I could talk about the silly way in which Corrales approached his fight with Mayweather in which he already revealed his tactics before hand of letting floyd win the first three rounds and him being focussed on hurting floyd instead - which he didn't even do.

[kiDynamite92]

If Castillo beat Floyd in the first fight then doesn't that make the rematch that much of a better win ?, can either Holmes or Ruddock claim to have a win close too someone like Floyd Mayweather ?, Michael Spinks comes closest if you count the 2nd fight as a win for Holmes but even then Spinks wasn't at his best.

Tyson may have crushed his opponents, where as Floyd didn't have the power or style too 'crush' them he beat them just as impressively as Tyson did in his own way in that he's pretty much controlled every fight and rarely loses rounds.

He didn't 'nearly' beat Holyfield at all, he made Holyfield look sloppy at times and made some rounds competitive but it was Holyfield all the way, Mercer win is impressive but that's all Holmes has after fighting Tyson where as Castillo and Corrales both stayed competitive at a fairly high level.

Heard of a guy called Muhammad Ali? And the reason them two didn't have many other names to their resumes was because a lot of fighters were ducking them. eg Holyfield was being talked as an opponent to a Prime Razor Ruddock but instead he choose not to fight him but instead George Foreman. Also Holmes was surpose to fight Foreman, however Foreman didn't take up that offer. I can talk all day about the people that Floyd should have fought but instead has a list of reasons for not fighting them.

Tyson's wins were far more impressive that Mayweathers when they fought several opposition. Mayweather pot shots a lot of fighters to a UD where Tyson was smacking people across the ring, beating them mentally before the fight so they choose to run.

Homes gave Holyfield a ton of trouble, and calling him old and slow when he's he's able to go the full 12 against the greatest cruiserweight of all time says something.

[Canelo Phresh]

Gong:

you ever watch duran pedroza 1 or duran kirkland laing? If so, should duran's problems in those fights be factored in when answering this question?

I read through a few pages just to see if gong would respond. I knew he wouldnt but hoped he would. He really is just a d*ck licking p-tard.

[howdy potna]

I read through a few pages just to see if gong would respond. I knew he wouldnt but hoped he would. He really is just a d*ck licking p-tard.

And you're a d*ck licking floydiot, what's the difference?

[Canelo Phresh]

And you're a d*ck licking floydiot, what's the difference?

You see me downgrading Duran or hyping Floyd. Nope but you also dont offer anything substance either. So what was your favorite Duran fight exluding his fights agaist the other horsemen? Which fight of Floyds was he horribly exposed in? Do you only watch pac fights?

[DannYankee]

I would have said Duran if it wasn't for " no mas"

[Optimistic]

Both incredibly talented, skillful fighters, but I think Duran edges it.

Just overall the more complete boxer IMHO.