Duran V Hearns 1980

[TIGEREDGE]

I belive that this would of been a different fight in 1980. hearns would win but duran would have his moments. i go for a points victory for the hitman, but duran could pulll it off

duran was still good in 84, but he was not the force he was in 1979 early 80

[ChrisPontius]

Hearns would always kill him. Just like Foreman & Frazier.

[Fedor Em]

Hearns beats him at any weight but Duran might last the distance in this one.

[Mankind]

I belive that this would of been a different fight in 1980. hearns would win but duran would have his moments. i go for a points victory for the hitman, but duran could pulll it off

duran was still good in 84, but he was not the force he was in 1979 early 80

I was just thinking about that.....the Duran that pounds Leonard....the Leonard who goes on to KO Hearns.......

Man Duran was never knocked out like that ever again even though he fought the likes of hagler and barkley.


Duran wasnt prepared for Hearns and surely didnt think he could be KO'd by anyone

both in 1980 yea what a crazy war

[JohnThomas1]

Hearns KO3

[Holmes' Jab]

Yep. Hearns destroys Duran, early too.

[George W Hedge]

Hearns beats him at any weight but Duran might last the distance in this one.

This could be true.

If duran were ever to beat hearns then it would be this duran, the duran from montreal.

:good

[Robbi]

Hearns KO3

I disagree. The welterweight Duran had better much sharpness, and his ability at slipping punches was in a different ballpark to the straight up and down static version who fought Hearns at light-middleweight. Leonard never had the same wingspan of Hearns, but Duran slipped and countered beautifully from longe range in Montreal. He'd would not have the same success against Hearns, who was much busier with the jab than Leonard. But Duran's all round quickness of foot and hand would take him a few rounds.

Hearns KO8.

[brooklyn1550]

Hearns by mid round knockout

[Titan1]

Hearns would always kill him. Just like Foreman & Frazier.


:good

[young griffo]

The Duran nuthuggers need to let this one go.

Hearns was a nightmare both physically and stylistically for Duran and I don't see Duran ever beating him.

That is unless Hearns could shrivel his 6ft 1 frame down to Lightweight then Duran would win but otherwise Hearns is too big,fast and powerful.

Hearns KO 4.

[Duodenum]

I was just thinking about that.....the Duran that pounds Leonard....the Leonard who goes on to KO Hearns.......

Man Duran was never knocked out like that ever again even though he fought the likes of hagler and barkley.


Duran wasnt prepared for Hearns and surely didnt think he could be KO'd by anyone

both in 1980 yea what a crazy warI've always bucked the trend on evaluating how Montreal Duran would have done against peak Hearns. Duran was in peak condition, and I believed he had the perfect style to slip underneath Tommy's shots and pound his lanky body. Duran seemed impervious when in peak condition, which he wasn't when Tommy blew him out. If he could have gotten Hearns into deep water, then I believe he could have drowned Tommy.

That Hearns could easily blow out Duran in two, yet never seriously stun Benitez is curious to me. It also seems odd that El Cholo could wear down and drop Barkley, whose best work wasn't able to faze Duran, after the Blade had flattened Hearns.

Although the vast majority on this board have not agreed with my conclusions about Hearns/Duran, that Tommy caught lightning in a bottle, I stand by that assessment. (However, I fully understand why most others feel differently about this.) The fact remains that Duran was far more elusive a target in Montreal than he was against Hearns. I think Roberto was in many respects an overconfident victim of his own success against Hagler.

I still believe that if Duran had met Hearns for a WW unification bout in the aftermath of Montreal, then he would have prevailed, being mindful of Tommy's fresh annihilation of Cuevas. (I do agree that at the time he actually did face Hearns, his chances of winning were far less going in.) Patterson avenged a devastating loss to Johansson in very impressive fashion, and Duran was certainly greater than Floyd. Maybe Hearns was Robeto's Foreman or Liston, but could he also have been El Cholo's Ingo? We'll never know.

[TIGEREDGE]

I've always bucked the trend on evaluating how Montreal Duran would have done against peak Hearns. Duran was in peak condition, and I believed he had the perfect style to slip underneath Tommy's shots and pound his lanky body. Duran seemed impervious when in peak condition, which he wasn't when Tommy blew him out. If he could have gotten Hearns into deep water, then I believe he could have drowned Tommy.

That Hearns could easily blow out Duran in two, yet never seriously stun Benitez is curious to me. It also seems odd that El Cholo could wear down and drop Barkley, whose best work wasn't able to faze Duran, after the Blade had flattened Hearns.

Although the vast majority on this board have not agreed with my conclusions about Hearns/Duran, that Tommy caught lightning in a bottle, I stand by that assessment. (However, I fully understand why most others feel differently about this.) The fact remains that Duran was far more elusive a target in Montreal than he was against Hearns. I think Roberto was in many respects an overconfident victim of his own success against Hagler.

I still believe that if Duran had met Hearns for a WW unification bout in the aftermath of Montreal, then he would have prevailed, being mindful of Tommy's fresh annihilation of Cuevas. (I do agree that at the time he actually did face Hearns, his chances of winning were far less going in.) Patterson avenged a devastating loss to Johansson in very impressive fashion, and Duran was certainly greater than Floyd. Maybe Hearns was Robeto's Foreman or Liston, but could he also have been El Cholo's Ingo? We'll never know.

best reply so far. duran was a different beast in 80

[smokin joe]

dawg hearns aint invinclible he;s got no chin, dont gets crazy over a 4 min fight, cause roberto duran beat sugar ray leanord in a 45 minjute fight, while hagler had hearns beat after 3 min

[robert ungurean]

Duran by late stoppage.

[divac]

I've always bucked the trend on evaluating how Montreal Duran would have done against peak Hearns. Duran was in peak condition, and I believed he had the perfect style to slip underneath Tommy's shots and pound his lanky body. Duran seemed impervious when in peak condition, which he wasn't when Tommy blew him out. If he could have gotten Hearns into deep water, then I believe he could have drowned Tommy.

That Hearns could easily blow out Duran in two, yet never seriously stun Benitez is curious to me. It also seems odd that El Cholo could wear down and drop Barkley, whose best work wasn't able to faze Duran, after the Blade had flattened Hearns.

Although the vast majority on this board have not agreed with my conclusions about Hearns/Duran, that Tommy caught lightning in a bottle, I stand by that assessment. (However, I fully understand why most others feel differently about this.) The fact remains that Duran was far more elusive a target in Montreal than he was against Hearns. I think Roberto was in many respects an overconfident victim of his own success against Hagler.

I still believe that if Duran had met Hearns for a WW unification bout in the aftermath of Montreal, then he would have prevailed, being mindful of Tommy's fresh annihilation of Cuevas. (I do agree that at the time he actually did face Hearns, his chances of winning were far less going in.) Patterson avenged a devastating loss to Johansson in very impressive fashion, and Duran was certainly greater than Floyd. Maybe Hearns was Robeto's Foreman or Liston, but could he also have been El Cholo's Ingo? We'll never know.

I agree with just about everything you said.

When you look at Roberto Duran past the Leonard fight in Montreal, he never beat anyone that was an elite fighter.
His best wins were vs Moorer and Barkley, both maybe good, but also very one dimensional and limited fighters.

To say that Hearns does to the Duran that beat Leonard what he did to him at 154 lbs, is insanely ludicrous.
That Roberto Duran was'nt even close to the one that beat Leonard.
In fact, Duran looked bloated vs Hearns at 154 lbs.

First off Duran was'nt only sharper at Welter, but he did everything better. Slip, counter, punch, stamina, you name it and he did it better.

Leonard basically beat Hearns by doing the things that Duran was famous for....getting on the inside and roughhousing.

Only Duran imo would have done it better than Leonard.

It would'nt be easy for the first half of the fight, but after the 6th round imo Duran owns Hearns.

You have it right Doudenum, Duran takes Hearns into deep water, and I say about the 9th or 10th round on, all we see is Hearns under water with bubbles popping out in the surface of it!

Tommy was just too skinny and malnourished a Welter imo to have dealt with any great Welter in history that was offensive minded, much less the great Roberto Duran.


Having said that, Hearns imo is overrated as a Welter, he looked so much better to me at 154 lbs!

[JohnThomas1]

Tommy was just too skinny and malnourished a Welter imo to have dealt with any great Welter in history that was offensive minded, much less the great Roberto Duran.



Leonard wasn't exactly the epitome of "offensive minded" in 90% of the fight, because it would have been suicide. He had to sit back, eat jabs and wait for the times he tagged Hearns with something substancial before getting too aggressive. If some great goes after Hearns they'd better have an ATG chin. This skinny and malnourished guy decimated many a fine chin at 147 in spectacular fashion.

[Stonehands89]

Duo and Divac offer the most sensible arguments here, in my opinion. But I can't quite throw my hat in that ring.

1980 Duran versus 1980 Hearns suffers severe physical disadvantages. Hearns would represent the most formidable threat to him by far. Far more than Leonard who, although greater than Hearns, did not dwarf Duran. Hearns had a frame that could comfortably carry 175. Leonard was a natural WW, and Duran's frame was ideal for 135.

The reach advantage was ridiculous, and when you combine that with Hearns' fast twitch fibers -which rival even Jones', it spells serious danger to a short-armed, box-shaped Duran. Hearns' power is something else. Duran's chin was excellent, when he was in condition and focussed, Duran's chin was even better and his defense was excellent. BUT -no one can take too many shots from Hearns and Hearns would be throwing fast, straight shots at the shorter man at will. Duran won't evade them all.

Hearns' distance negotiation would come into play here as well. He had efficient mobility and was not adverse to stepping back or to the side to deal the inevitable Duran rushes.

Hearns' jab was like a piston -he could double it up, stutter it, feint it, and completely disrupt Duran's plan. He could throw it at Duran's chest and keep him off balance. Duran would have a helluva time trying to get set and trying to get in.

My point is that Hearns is Duran's nightmare.

However,

Hearns fades. I reject any argument that Hearns was as formidable at 147 as he was at 154. He was weaker -it's physics. The man's weight was too low to disperse over such a long frame. His ribs were exposed, his legs were spindly. His head looked like a bean.

Duran has some things going for him in 1980. Arcel and Brown would be with him so he would not have employed the idiot strategy he did in '84. He was near-peak and would be in supreme condition.

Duran would have to stick to him like a cheap suit, angle around him, and try to keep Hearns on the defensive for the first 5 rounds -overhands, rib shots, hip shots when possible. He would have to be more tight in terms of defense than he ever had been before. His corner would need to adjust his aggression dependent on Hearns gas tank round by round. Duran would necessarily have to be stronger as the fight went on and he would have to survive the first 5 rounds in tact. No easy task there.

An analogy: Robinson found Turpin to be a stylistic foil for him. Robinson beating Turpin increased his greatness because of that. Duran beating Hearns would be 10 times greater -and more surprising -no, it would be miraculous.

[Duodenum]

An analogy: Robinson found Turpin to be a stylistic foil for him. Robinson beating Turpin increased his greatness because of that. Duran beating Hearns would be 10 times greater -and more surprising -no, it would be miraculous.
Miraculous = Duran W 12 Barkley. If Roberto had in in him in 1989, then he surely could have had it in him during 1980.

[JohnThomas1]

Miraculous = Duran W 12 Barkley. If Roberto had in in him in 1989, then he surely could have had it in him during 1980.

And indeed in 1984..........

[Stonehands89]

Duo...

Barkley was peaking that night in my opinion. He never looked better than he did against Duran before or after. However, he had neither the skill nor the power nor the speed of Hearns. Barkley brought a completely different set of strengths against Duran. Duran could cope with that set far easier than he could against what Hearns' brought.

JT....

The Duran that stepped into the ring in June 1980 was a beast.
The Duran that stepped into the ring against Hearns 4 years later was a half-ass.

[JohnThomas1]

JT....

The Duran that stepped into the ring in June 1980 was a beast.
The Duran that stepped into the ring against Hearns 4 years later was a half-ass.
It was rather hard not to point out the obvious tho. And i still believe Hearns takes Duran out impressively at any point, but it's all opinion of course.

[zivic1941]

Styles....always a car wreck. Hearns early.

[JohnThomas1]

Styles....always a car wreck. Hearns early.

And it's jolly good to see you posting!

[zivic1941]

just had to pipe in on that one......it's just one of those styles issues....

[JohnThomas1]

just had to pipe in on that one......it's just one of those styles issues....

Totally agree.

[Doppleganger]

Totally agree.
I also concur. Whilst Duran was undoubtedly better at 147, even the Duran of New Orleans still won't be able to deal with the physical and stylistic problems that Thomas Hearns brings to the table. Tommy will land hard and often and his jab will completely disrupt Duran's gameplan. It may go longer but not much longer.

Hearns KO3 Duran.

[CzarKyle]

After seeing this thread I decided to watch a nice amount of Hearns and Duran around that era*. I started taking notes here and there, watched their postures, found punch totals, and various other research techniques to reach a conclusion. And this is what I've come to. Hearns may have been quite the bomber with a crisp punching style and very rangy due to his freakish height, but Duran at his best was a master fighter that capable of dominating nearly anyone. These two meeting up in that time period would have created a stylistic match up greater than the first Leonard - Duran meeting. Roberto would have created an insane amount of problems and Tommy could have done the same. I'll have to say the outcome of this fight would favor Duran. And on top of that, there is a great chance that Duran could have put Hearns down in the late rounds. A Hearns that young had no true idea of how far his chin would extend himself. He obviously overextended himself against Leonard and it is a possibility that Duran could do something similar to Hearns.

* Duran Vs. De Jesus 1978
Duran Vs. Palomino 1979
Duran Vs. SRL I 1980
Duran Vs. SRL II 1980
Hearns Vs. Cuevas 1980
Hearns Vs. Shields 1981
Hearns Vs. SRL I 1981

Also Duran Vs. Hearns 1984.

[Jear]

I've always bucked the trend on evaluating how Montreal Duran would have done against peak Hearns. Duran was in peak condition, and I believed he had the perfect style to slip underneath Tommy's shots and pound his lanky body. Duran seemed impervious when in peak condition, which he wasn't when Tommy blew him out. If he could have gotten Hearns into deep water, then I believe he could have drowned Tommy.

That Hearns could easily blow out Duran in two, yet never seriously stun Benitez is curious to me. It also seems odd that El Cholo could wear down and drop Barkley, whose best work wasn't able to faze Duran, after the Blade had flattened Hearns.

Although the vast majority on this board have not agreed with my conclusions about Hearns/Duran, that Tommy caught lightning in a bottle, I stand by that assessment. (However, I fully understand why most others feel differently about this.) The fact remains that Duran was far more elusive a target in Montreal than he was against Hearns. I think Roberto was in many respects an overconfident victim of his own success against Hagler.

I still believe that if Duran had met Hearns for a WW unification bout in the aftermath of Montreal, then he would have prevailed, being mindful of Tommy's fresh annihilation of Cuevas. (I do agree that at the time he actually did face Hearns, his chances of winning were far less going in.) Patterson avenged a devastating loss to Johansson in very impressive fashion, and Duran was certainly greater than Floyd. Maybe Hearns was Robeto's Foreman or Liston, but could he also have been El Cholo's Ingo? We'll never know.



Duran who beat Leonard still had the flaw of parrying jabs downward with his left hand, a habit he had against Buchanan and maintained until he retired. Tommy could always drop the right hand over this and land on his chin because of his height. Duran never had to deal with this bad habit because Tommy was the first one with that big of a height reach advantage and power.

Steward and Hearns said they planned to jab to the shoulder to get Roberto to have to block lower and then drop the right in. It is a flaw in Durans style that causes Hearns to beat him every time in my opinion

[Doppleganger]

Duran who beat Leonard still had the flaw of parrying jabs downward with his left hand, a habit he had against Buchanan and maintained until he retired. Tommy could always drop the right hand over this and land on his chin because of his height. Duran never had to deal with this bad habit because Tommy was the first one with that big of a height reach advantage and power.

Steward and Hearns said they planned to jab to the shoulder to get Roberto to have to block lower and then drop the right in. It is a flaw in Durans style that causes Hearns to beat him every time in my opinion
Interesting observation and not having seen that many of Duran's fights at lightweight one I never noticed before. No surprise that Steward told Tommy to jab to the shoulder as it's exactly the same thing he told Lewis to do against David Tua.

[JohnThomas1]

Interesting observation and not having seen that many of Duran's fights at lightweight one I never noticed before. No surprise that Steward told Tommy to jab to the shoulder as it's exactly the same thing he told Lewis to do against David Tua.

I've got it somewhere here, Jear is spot on with Tommy's gameplan. Jabbing to the chest and feinting the jab too the chest was a big plan going in.

[divac]

Interesting observation and not having seen that many of Duran's fights at lightweight one I never noticed before. No surprise that Steward told Tommy to jab to the shoulder as it's exactly the same thing he told Lewis to do against David Tua.

Why did'nt Lewis drop the right hand down the pike as Hearns did vs Duran???

Its not as simple at to say Hearns sucess came because of a flaw in Duran's defense with parring jabs downward.....

.....sure Duran had flaws, the least of which was his parrying a jab downward. More than that, his ability to manuever the ring, and his reflexes to defend shots and get them off.....not to even mention that the media had seen that he was having poor workouts in the couple of weeks prior to Hearns.

To put it in simple terms, the Duran that faced Hearns was still a capable fighter, but a fighter who was way past the fighter who was capable of dealing with the elites.


Compare the Duran that faced and gave Hagler a close fight just a fight prior to Hearns.....compare that Duran to the Duran that faced Leonard?

Duran is fighting in slow motion against Hagler if you then look and compare that to how he was fighting with Leonard.

Everyting is uptempo'd for the Leonard fight if you compare it to the Hagler fight, thats how much Duran had slipped.

It should'nt be a suprise to anybody that a fighter with the special unatural abilities of Hearns is able to put that version of Duran, face first to the canvas.

Hearns was a beatable, but a very special fighter, and you sure better be in the prime of you abilities and on your A game to beat a prime version of him.
Duran was sure nowhere near that at any time after the Leonard No Mas fight!


I laugh at those with the thought process that say that Duran beating Barkley 5 years after Hearns is an indicator that Duran had alot left 5 years earlier vs Hearns.
One thing is to beat a much less faceted fighter like Barkley....Duran's sheer skill did that, helped by the fact that Barkley did'nt offer any of the multifaceted unatural abilities that Hearns created......and another thing is for that same aging Duran who has lost alot of his youthful abilities, speed, quickness, stamina, even tenacity, and expect that fighter to compete with prime Tommy Hearns.

I cant say it any other way but to say that its stupid to think that the Duran that faced Hearns is anywhere in the league of the Duran that beat Leonard in Montreal.
To me a statement of Hearns always blitzes Duran in the same way no matter the point in time that they face eachother is the equivalent....(just an example) of Lennox Lewis starching the version of Muhamad Ali that was beaten by Larry Holmes, and claiming that Lewis does that to Ali at any point in his career.......
Exactly, that statement is STUPID!!!!

......and you know what, Lennox Lewis could very well have starched the version that was beaten by Holmes, and done it much the same way Hearns did vs Duran!

Its just boggles me that even the simplist of boxing fans cant understand this.

[redrooster]

Duran would chop him down. Whatever Ray can do, Duran could do better.

[Jear]

Why did'nt Lewis drop the right hand down the pike as Hearns did vs Duran???

Its not as simple at to say Hearns sucess came because of a flaw in Duran's defense with parring jabs downward.....

.....sure Duran had flaws, the least of which was his parrying a jab downward. More than that, his ability to manuever the ring, and his reflexes to defend shots and get them off.....not to even mention that the media had seen that he was having poor workouts in the couple of weeks prior to Hearns.

To put it in simple terms, the Duran that faced Hearns was still a capable fighter, but a fighter who was way past the fighter who was capable of dealing with the elites.


Compare the Duran that faced and gave Hagler a close fight just a fight prior to Hearns.....compare that Duran to the Duran that faced Leonard?

Duran is fighting in slow motion against Hagler if you then look and compare that to how he was fighting with Leonard.

Everyting is uptempo'd for the Leonard fight if you compare it to the Hagler fight, thats how much Duran had slipped.

It should'nt be a suprise to anybody that a fighter with the special unatural abilities of Hearns is able to put that version of Duran, face first to the canvas.

Hearns was a beatable, but a very special fighter, and you sure better be in the prime of you abilities and on your A game to beat a prime version of him.
Duran was sure nowhere near that at any time after the Leonard No Mas fight!


I laugh at those with the thought process that say that Duran beating Barkley 5 years after Hearns is an indicator that Duran had alot left 5 years earlier vs Hearns.
One thing is to beat a much less faceted fighter like Barkley....Duran's sheer skill did that, helped by the fact that Barkley did'nt offer any of the multifaceted unatural abilities that Hearns created......and another thing is for that same aging Duran who has lost alot of his youthful abilities, speed, quickness, stamina, even tenacity, and expect that fighter to compete with prime Tommy Hearns.

I cant say it any other way but to say that its stupid to think that the Duran that faced Hearns is anywhere in the league of the Duran that beat Leonard in Montreal.
To me a statement of Hearns always blitzes Duran in the same way no matter the point in time that they face eachother is the equivalent....(just an example) of Lennox Lewis starching the version of Muhamad Ali that was beaten by Larry Holmes, and claiming that Lewis does that to Ali at any point in his career.......
Exactly, that statement is STUPID!!!!

......and you know what, Lennox Lewis could very well have starched the version that was beaten by Holmes, and done it much the same way Hearns did vs Duran!

Its just boggles me that even the simplist of boxing fans cant understand this.



It is a flaw in his technique that Hearns has the tools to take advantage of always. Not the same Duran? Maybe not he never got a chance to show us. Maybe it was the same Duran and, as I feel, Tommy was just wrong for Duran. Leonard didnt hold the same physical advantages Tommy did so Duran was always going to have more success getting shots off against Ray

The Holmes Ali wasnt beaten because of technical errors he was beaten because he was old. And Lewis did drop the right hand on Tua, Tua decided he may well have ended up like Duran and decided to stay away.

Your comparison is illogical, maybe thats why us "simplistic boxing fans" dont see it your way.

You arent going to change everyones view so dont get frustrated just put your analysis across and let them decide for themselves.

[divac]

It is a flaw in his technique that Hearns has the tools to take advantage of always. Not the same Duran? Maybe not he never got a chance to show us. Maybe it was the same Duran and, as I feel, Tommy was just wrong for Duran. Leonard didnt hold the same physical advantages Tommy did so Duran was always going to have more success getting shots off against Ray

The Holmes Ali wasnt beaten because of technical errors he was beaten because he was old. And Lewis did drop the right hand on Tua, Tua decided he may well have ended up like Duran and decided to stay away.

Your comparison is illogical, maybe thats why us "simplistic boxing fans" dont see it your way.

You arent going to change everyones view so dont get frustrated just put your analysis across and let them decide for themselves.

Sure Ali was old, but he most likely could still beat most of the Heavyweight contenders at the time, just not a prime Larry Holmes!

I did'nt see Duran being destroyed by Hearns because he was parrying Hearns jab downward......
.....what I see is Duran not having the quickness or the speed to get inside of Hearns range.
Everytime Duran attempted to punch, Hearns quickly took a step back and was out of the slow footed Duran range.

I dont even think Duran got one good shot off at Hearns, and it was because he was constantly lunging at Hearns.....he did'nt have the quickness or speed of foot to manuever inside of Hearns range.

Imo it has little if anything to do with a flaw caused by Duran parrying Hearns jab down.

A prime Duran most likely parries that jab off expecting the right hand of Hearns to come and ducking under it.
That become quite difficult to do when you dont have nearly the reflexes or quickness to time and go with the flow of what Hearns is trying to do.



The Holmes Ali wasnt beaten because of technical errors he was beaten because he was old. And Lewis did drop the right hand on Tua, Tua decided he may well have ended up like Duran and decided to stay away.


Tua decided he may have ended up like Duran?:lol:
As did Lennox, as he never even attempted to get as candid as Hearns did vs Duran!
I dont think Hearns ever had the mindset to make a silent pact with a fighter to waltz through a fight and protect themselves from the others power!:rofl :rofl :rofl

[Jear]

Sure Ali was old, but he most likely could still beat most of the Heavyweight contenders at the time, just not a prime Larry Holmes!

I did'nt see Duran being destroyed by Hearns because he was parrying Hearns jab downward......
.....what I see is Duran not having the quickness or the speed to get inside of Hearns range.
Everytime Duran attempted to punch, Hearns quickly took a step back and was out of the slow footed Duran range.

I dont even think Duran got one good shot off at Hearns, and it was because he was constantly lunging at Hearns.....he did'nt have the quickness or speed of foot to manuever inside of Hearns range.

Imo it has little if anything to do with a flaw caused by Duran parrying Hearns jab down.

A prime Duran most likely parries that jab off expecting the right hand of Hearns to come and ducking under it.
That become quite difficult to do when you dont have nearly the reflexes or quickness to time and go with the flow of what Hearns is trying to do.



Tua decided he may have ended up like Duran?:lol:
As did Lennox, as he never even attempted to get as candid as Hearns did vs Duran!
I dont think Hearns ever had the mindset to make a silent pact with a fighter to waltz through a fight and protect themselves from the others power!:rofl :rofl :rofl


Ali was struggling to beat top contenders and novices when he retired in 78, it is ignorant to suggest he could still beat top contenders in 80. I would be interested to hear these names.


Duran ducks under the right of Hearns?? That is exactly what he was trying to do when Tommy switched out the light. By jabbing lower Hearns asked him to parry lower opening up his chin longer. It wasnt reflexes that cost him, Tommy was too fast and hit too hard simple. His lack of footspeed is because of Hearns height and reach. Its not rocket science to understand if someone has long arms they can fight from further away therefore the shorter man has to move more and will look slower than he would against a shorter oponent.

Once Tua backed off Lewis had no need to take chances did he.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Sure Ali was old, but he most likely could still beat most of the Heavyweight contenders at the time, just not a prime Larry Holmes!


Ali couldn't have beaten my nan that night. Even Evangelista would have beaten that version of Ali (Alfredo received a controversial duke over my dear nanna later that year). ;)

[divac]

Ali was struggling to beat top contenders and novices when he retired in 78, it is ignorant to suggest he could still beat top contenders in 80. I would be interested to hear these names.


Duran ducks under the right of Hearns?? That is exactly what he was trying to do when Tommy switched out the light. By jabbing lower Hearns asked him to parry lower opening up his chin longer. It wasnt reflexes that cost him, Tommy was too fast and hit too hard simple. His lack of footspeed is because of Hearns height and reach. Its not rocket science to understand if someone has long arms they can fight from further away therefore the shorter man has to move more and will look slower than he would against a shorter oponent.

Once Tua backed off Lewis had no need to take chances did he.

I agree, Ali had slipped significantly even when he retired having avenged his loss to Leon Spinks in 1978......
My point is that even that version of Ali was still capable of beating less faceted contenders the equivalent in skill level to Davey Moore and Iran Barkley, but he was'nt because he had slipped so much going to beat a truly elite skilled fighter in his division (like Larry Holmes) in Duran's case his Larry Holmes was Tommy Hearns.
......only in Duran's case, unlike Holmes, Hearns had the ability to end a fight with a single shot.

Duran and Ali may have not slipped equally in comparing them to their fights with Hearns and Holmes, but the point is that both had slipped significantly from what they once were.


Lewis hardcores can believe what they want, but his fight with Tua was'nt a fight or a boxing lesson, it was an outright mutually agreed upon waltz!:deal :yep

[JohnThomas1]

It should'nt be a suprise to anybody that a fighter with the special unatural abilities of Hearns is able to put that version of Duran, face first to the canvas.


To the contrary Hearns himself was about the only person around picking him via KO, let alone in the second round. The result and finish was nominated the most shocking of the decade by many major publications. Such a feat was never seen before nor since with Duran

I cant say it any other way but to say that its stupid to think that the Duran that faced Hearns is anywhere in the league of the Duran that beat Leonard in Montreal.

Who is saying that tho? What people are saying is that they believe the stylistic matchup is such that it doesn't matter what Duran turns up.

To me a statement of Hearns always blitzes Duran in the same way no matter the point in time that they face eachother is the equivalent....(just an example) of Lennox Lewis starching the version of Muhamad Ali that was beaten by Larry Holmes, and claiming that Lewis does that to Ali at any point in his career.......
Exactly, that statement is STUPID!!!!

PULEASE! What sort of comparison is that? Really? Was Ali coming off a great effort vs the best P4P fighter in boxing? Had Ali recently won a world title via total dominace of a young champion? Did Ali win a credible world title 5 years after fighting Holmes? Had Duran not fought for a full two years like Ali?

If the Hearns - Duran statement is stupid, what are we to call this comparison? I don't think the word is yet invented. You can do far better than that lot dude.

[JohnThomas1]

Ali couldn't have beaten my nan that night. Even Evangelista would have beaten that version of Ali (Alfredo received a controversial duke over my dear nanna later that year). ;)

MDWC's nan TKO7 Ali, because she doesn't show mercy unlike The Mallard. .

[divac]

To the contrary Hearns himself was about the only person around picking him via KO, let alone in the second round. The result and finish was nominated the most shocking of the decade by many major publications. Such a feat was never seen before nor since with Duran



Who is saying that tho? What people are saying is that they believe the stylistic matchup is such that it doesn't matter what Duran turns up.



PULEASE! What sort of comparison is that? Really? Was Ali coming off a great effort vs the best P4P fighter in boxing? Had Ali recently won a world title via total dominace of a young champion? Did Ali win a credible world title 5 years after fighting Holmes? Had Duran not fought for a full two years like Ali?

If the Hearns - Duran statement is stupid, what are we to call this comparison? I don't think the word is yet invented. You can do far better than that lot dude.


Coming off a great effort vs Hagler?

Is'nt it you who has always asserted that that Hagler-Duran fight was'nt even close?
.....or am I confusing you with somebody else?

Speed and quickness.....Hagler was'nt in that league in that dept with fighters who had dominated Duran during that time frame.
Benitez with speed and quickness absolutely dominated Duran from start to finish. That was a good indicator right there that Duran was'nt going to be able to deal with Hearns speed and quickness.

Aging fading fighters rarely if ever are able to cope with speed and quickness.

BTW, it might have gotten lost in the thread, but my argument is that a quick devestating KO by Hearns is not proof that he gets it done vs a prime version of Duran at 147 lbs......I think alot of members in this forum over the years are of the opinion that Hearns dealing with Duran is the very proof that he could do it to any version of Duran.
Thats what my disagreement is with!


Maybe I did'nt make myself clear with my parrallel with Ali.
I'll make it clearer.

The Ali who lost to Leon Spinks was riding a 14 fight winning streak and had'nt lost in 5 years.....

Since you're very high on Lennox Lewis, dont you think that a prime Lennox Lewis was capable of destroying the version of Ali that lost to Leon Spinks in 1978?

Imo Lewis, or any big sized superheavy with bonafide punching power like the Klitchko bros. and Riddick Bowe, KO's the version of Ali that was fighting around the time frame of 75-78 without much of a problem.

Whats your opinion on that JT?

[Doppleganger]

Why did'nt Lewis drop the right hand down the pike as Hearns did vs Duran???

To me a statement of Hearns always blitzes Duran in the same way no matter the point in time that they face eachother is the equivalent....(just an example) of Lennox Lewis starching the version of Muhamad Ali that was beaten by Larry Holmes, and claiming that Lewis does that to Ali at any point in his career.......
Exactly, that statement is STUPID!!!!

......and you know what, Lennox Lewis could very well have starched the version that was beaten by Holmes, and done it much the same way Hearns did vs Duran!

Its just boggles me that even the simplist of boxing fans cant understand this.
Well, to begin with Lewis did throw the right hand down the pike at Tua, who took them and then having tasted Lewis's power became very cautious. Lewis, unlike Hearns, was not given to be drawn into brawls and so took the safety-first route of outpointing Tua from distance. Moreover, Tua was a dangerous puncher at heavyweight whereas Duran at 154, whilst a respectable puncher, could not be classed as dangerous.

I think you're a good poster Divac but your analogy regarding Ali vs Holmes/Lewis doesn't make much sense within this argument. One of the reasons why Hearns will always beat Duran IMO is due to styles and physicality. Neither of these factors have the same relevance regarding any potential match-up between Ali and Lewis.

[Duodenum]

After seeing this thread I decided to watch a nice amount of Hearns and Duran around that era*. I started taking notes here and there, watched their postures, found punch totals, and various other research techniques to reach a conclusion. And this is what I've come to. Hearns may have been quite the bomber with a crisp punching style and very rangy due to his freakish height, but Duran at his best was a master fighter that capable of dominating nearly anyone. These two meeting up in that time period would have created a stylistic match up greater than the first Leonard - Duran meeting. Roberto would have created an insane amount of problems and Tommy could have done the same. I'll have to say the outcome of this fight would favor Duran. And on top of that, there is a great chance that Duran could have put Hearns down in the late rounds. A Hearns that young had no true idea of how far his chin would extend himself. He obviously overextended himself against Leonard and it is a possibility that Duran could do something similar to Hearns.

* Duran Vs. De Jesus 1978
Duran Vs. Palomino 1979
Duran Vs. SRL I 1980
Duran Vs. SRL II 1980
Hearns Vs. Cuevas 1980
Hearns Vs. Shields 1981
Hearns Vs. SRL I 1981

Also Duran Vs. Hearns 1984.It's obvious that you have conducted some freshly diligent research here.

While these matches are also familiar to me, I additionally took a look at Duran/Fernandez and Duran/Brooks, where Roberto brought down each for the ten count with bodyblows, then contrasted that with SRL's late downstairs attack in the first meeting with Hearns. As tough as Brooks could be, and as fleet footed and elusive as Fernandez was, Duran negated the question of their chins by the manner in which he took them out.

Tommy did not have the body at WW which he later grew into as his poundage increased. Duran took Brooks out at Monroe's highest recorded competitive weight (while weighing 143 himself, about what he should have weighed for a WW battle with Tommy). Vilomar, although a lightweight, had a shorter stockier build than those typical of that division, and was extremely well conditioned.

As Arcel said to Duran late in the Fernandez bout: "We know how hard his chin is. Now let's find out about his stomach." El Cholo might not even have to concern himself with Tommy's chin, considering what SRL was able to do to his lanky body. Duran was badly out of shape at 149-1/2 when he took on 6'0" Zeferino "Speedy" Gonzalez during the SRL/Hawk Price card in September 1979. While he wasn't in condition to knock Zeferino out, he did pitch a near shutout rather easily. What's important to emphasize here though, is that by 1980, Duran had ten recent rounds of experience in competition against an opponent of Tommy's stature. In peak condition, he would have had the knowledge accrued from those ten rounds of boxing to know in his own mind how to go about chopping Hearns down to size.

[JohnThomas1]

Coming off a great effort vs Hagler?

Is'nt it you who has always asserted that that Hagler-Duran fight was'nt even close?
.....or am I confusing you with somebody else?

Maybe, you did mistake me for a hater of Chavez.

In a nutshell

Duran performed better than expected vs Hagler whilst Hagler performed much more poorly than expected. Hagler IMO still won this fight clearly.

Speed and quickness.....Hagler was'nt in that league in that dept with fighters who had dominated Duran during that time frame.
Benitez with speed and quickness absolutely dominated Duran from start to finish. That was a good indicator right there that Duran was'nt going to be able to deal with Hearns speed and quickness.
Fair call here, fair call, with one proviso. Hearns still wasn't expected to decimate Duran, but he was favoured to outbox him by most.

Aging fading fighters rarely if ever are able to cope with speed and quickness.
Hard to argue on the whole here.

BTW, it might have gotten lost in the thread, but my argument is that a quick devestating KO by Hearns is not proof that he gets it done vs a prime version of Duran at 147 lbs......I think alot of members in this forum over the years are of the opinion that Hearns dealing with Duran is the very proof that he could do it to any version of Duran.
Thats what my disagreement is with!
Yes but i think you have underestimated the quality of poster on this thread. These guys aren't simply basing their whole assumption on this fight. They have looked at other intangibles and still think Hearns is stylistic doom for Duran, and i agree. Zivic's similar thoughts give me substancial confidence here. He's been around the traps has that one.

You might be right, i might be right, who knows. Anything is certainly possible and i respect your stance, if not your comparison.Bleh...

Maybe I did'nt make myself clear with my parrallel with Ali.
I'll make it clearer.

The Ali who lost to Leon Spinks was riding a 14 fight winning streak and had'nt lost in 5 years.....
Mate, the comparison stinks lol. I can't describe it any other way. I'd just say oops, i take that one back.




Maybe I did'nt make myself clear with my parrallel with Ali.
I'll make it clearer.

The Ali who lost to Leon Spinks was riding a 14 fight winning streak and had'nt lost in 5 years.....

Since you're very high on Lennox Lewis, dont you think that a prime Lennox Lewis was capable of destroying the version of Ali that lost to Leon Spinks in 1978?


Do you think that version of Ali was akin to the medicated half dead zombie who walked into the ring vs Holmes?

Imo Lewis, or any big sized superheavy with bonafide punching power like the Klitchko bros. and Riddick Bowe, KO's the version of Ali that was fighting around the time frame of 75-78 without much of a problem.

Whats your opinion on that JT?
Highly possible. It's a pity you didn't claim anything like this when you made your comparison tho, you chose the sickly version of Ali who fought Holmes. A far cry from where you are now heading to.

Off topic but what lightweights do you think would have troubled Duran? What style would you see as one that could potentially trouble him? I think a super speedy boxer could be difficult, but whether or not there has been one born with enough class to beat Duran is another story. I know you despise him, but i think Whitaker would have been one of his better challenges.

[divac]

Maybe, you did mistake me for a hater of Chavez.

In a nutshell

Duran performed better than expected vs Hagler whilst Hagler performed much more poorly than expected. Hagler IMO still won this fight clearly.


Fair call here, fair call, with one proviso. Hearns still wasn't expected to decimate Duran, but he was favoured to outbox him by most.


Hard to argue on the whole here.


Yes but i think you have underestimated the quality of poster on this thread. These guys aren't simply basing their whole assumption on this fight. They have looked at other intangibles and still think Hearns is stylistic doom for Duran, and i agree. Zivic's similar thoughts give me substancial confidence here. He's been around the traps has that one.

You might be right, i might be right, who knows. Anything is certainly possible and i respect your stance, if not your comparison.Bleh...


Mate, the comparison stinks lol. I can't describe it any other way. I'd just say oops, i take that one back.







Do you think that version of Ali was akin to the medicated half dead zombie who walked into the ring vs Holmes?


Highly possible. It's a pity you didn't claim anything like this when you made your comparison tho, you chose the sickly version of Ali who fought Holmes. A far cry from where you are now heading to.

Off topic but what lightweights do you think would have troubled Duran? What style would you see as one that could potentially trouble him? I think a super speedy boxer could be difficult, but whether or not there has been one born with enough class to beat Duran is another story. I know you despise him, but i think Whitaker would have been one of his better challenges.


I may have taken it a bit far by parralelling Duran's situation with that of Ali and mentioning Holmes.......
......the point I was trying to make however is that even that Ali could have at least been competitive with some good fighters not the elite quality of Holmes.

To be truthful, and I've always been honest about my boxing knowleadge starting from the early eighties.....so I'm no expert at just how much Ali had left during those late 70's matches he had.
My guess is that up to the Spinks fight, he had enough left to beat most but the genuine A level fighter.
Thats where my parralell draws with Duran's.
Duran during his mid to late 30's had enough left to on a given night beat most good fighters, just not those who were genuine A level.

At above Welter, Duran won on skill and guile alone. He did'nt have the speed, quickness, or even power to match most of the fighters he was fighting......and when you take on an elite like Hearns, Leonard, and Hagler, those disadvantages are going to stick out like a sore thumb.

....btw, I had the Hagler-Duran fight very close, but I've conceded more than once on this forum that Hagler fought an overly cautious fight and could have very well dominated Duran had he not given him so much respect.
.....in any regard, Hagler's forte which wasnt speed and quickness to the level that Hearns and Leonard used it.......except for stamina is'nt one that would overwhelm an aging fighter like Duran who could still fight well, just not with the elite for years to come.
Like I said before, speed and quickness is what usually will overwhelm an aging fighter.


Yes but i think you have underestimated the quality of poster on this thread. These guys aren't simply basing their whole assumption on this fight. They have looked at other intangibles and still think Hearns is stylistic doom for Duran, and i agree. Zivic's similar thoughts give me substancial confidence here. He's been around the traps has that one.

If they're not basing their assumption on just this here fight, what are they basing it on????
Remember, we are talking a prime Duran vs Hearns at 147 lbs, not 154 lbs!

Did someone I dont know about who was tall, fast and quick just tee off on Duran at will with him not even been able to get a shot off????

Did Duran throughout his career have trouble getting inside a tall fighters reach???????What are these posters you talk about basing it on?

I base my opinion that past Montreal, Duran could still compete with most but the highly quick and speedy fighters, besides Hearns....Leonard and Benitez are the prime examples......and Leonard and Benitez dominated Duran in their own style, Hearns just happens to have a devestating punch to go along with his quickness and speed......
.....but I have no doubt, that Duran would more than compete with each of them fully prepared and in his prime!


What I see are posters just stating that Hearns would have been a stylistic nightmare at any point in Duran's career and leave it at that.
Where are the examples of fights against tall rangy fighters that would lead us to believe Hearns would do the same against a prime Duran.
Give me some fight examples Duran has had that would leave me to believe Duran gets blown away in his prime vs Tommy.

Give them to me JT???

[JohnThomas1]

I may have taken it a bit far by parralelling Duran's situation with that of Ali and mentioning Holmes.......


You don't say! lol

the point I was trying to make however is that even that Ali could have at least been competitive with some good fighters not the elite quality of Holmes.

Duran beat a legitmate world champion who had beaten Hearns who had of course lamblasted Duran. This was years after Hearns mopped the floor with Duran.

I will severely disagree the exact Ali of the Holmes fight could have been competitive with some good fighters. Lets be honest, Ali totally sucked that night and was actually better vs Berbick minus the meds.

To be truthful, and I've always been honest about my boxing knowleadge starting from the early eighties.....so I'm no expert at just how much Ali had left during those late 70's matches he had.
My guess is that up to the Spinks fight, he had enough left to beat most but the genuine A level fighter.

Ali lived on more than a bit of smoke and mirror late career but yeah, could still sneak by some decent fighters. You do however make a grave error in remotely comparing the Ali who fought Spinks to the Ali who fought Holmes IMO.

Thats where my parralell draws with Duran's.
Duran during his mid to late 30's had enough left to on a given night beat most good fighters, just not those who were genuine A level.

Barkley was a good fighter, it was a fine win. Duran beat him because he was suited styilistically. VS Hearns he was not, and we in the Hearns camp say he was never stylistically suited to Hearns. As you said, speed and elusiveness beats an older and heavier Duran and truth be told SRL never used his speed to his advantage in fight 1 and wasn't elusive at all. He willingly slugged it out. In the rematch, and i don't care what the excuses, he pranced around Duran and frustrated the living hell out of him. A boxing Leonard in the first fight hell bent on imposing his own strategy would have been a vastly different proposition. As would the scyth like Hearns.

At above Welter, Duran won on skill and guile alone. He did'nt have the speed, quickness, or even power to match most of the fighters he was fighting......and when you take on an elite like Hearns, Leonard, and Hagler, those disadvantages are going to stick out like a sore thumb.

Duran could do nothing with Leonards speed and elusiveness in the rematch. Leonard willingly went toe to toe in the original. One fight doesn't make the man. Duran had the same dilemna's at 147, but it wasn't exposed to the same degree. Leonard didn't use his speed and got beaten. Leonard used his speed and won. Palomino was slow. Duran didn't spend the time at 147 or fight the fighters that would have shown this more clearly. I do not go for the Duran made him slug theory one bit.

....btw, I had the Hagler-Duran fight very close, but I've conceded more than once on this forum that Hagler fought an overly cautious fight and could have very well dominated Duran had he not given him so much respect.
.....in any regard, Hagler's forte which wasnt speed and quickness to the level that Hearns and Leonard used it.......except for stamina is'nt one that would overwhelm an aging fighter like Duran who could still fight well, just not with the elite for years to come.
Like I said before, speed and quickness is what usually will overwhelm an aging fighter.

Totally agree, your Hagler comments are spot on.

Did Duran throughout his career have trouble getting inside a tall fighters reach???????What are these posters you talk about basing it on?

What Hearn's like fighter did Duran ever face? Only one, and we know what transpired. Hearns is in a league of his own on Duran's resume, there's no-one comparable.

I base my opinion that past Montreal, Duran could still compete with most but the highly quick and speedy fighters, besides Hearns....Leonard and Benitez are the prime examples......and Leonard and Benitez dominated Duran in their own style, Hearns just happens to have a devestating punch to go along with his quickness and speed......
.....but I have no doubt, that Duran would more than compete with each of them fully prepared and in his prime!

As great an achievement as Duran's win over Leonard is, i have to say it has turned into part myth IMO. Leonard willingly fought Duran's fight in the trenches and didn't use his own assets at all. It would have been far more difficult if he did. In the second he did and we are left with excuses. Because of Leonard's willingness to trade in 1 big Duran fans see Duran as able to beat great fighters of immense speed like Hearns at 147. I don't. I think Benitez would have still given him kittens there personally. Am i understating the Leonard win? No. It was one of the greatest wins ever, a lightweight beating one of the greatest welters ever. Leonard thought he could overwhelm the smaller man, and was very mistaken. Even given his questionable tactics this is still a great win as Leonard could still mix it up quite well toe to toe and had significant size advantages.

Give me some fight examples Duran has had that would leave me to believe Duran gets blown away in his prime vs Tommy.

Give them to me JT???

Give me the examples pre Hearns of why Hearns would leave Duran a quivering wreck in a mere two rounds? It was named the most shocking boxing scene of the decade for a reason, and hindsight can't change that. Duran had gone a solid 15 with the best P4P in the business (and bigger again at 160 than Hearns) as well as never been stopped.

A clear head would tell us it is possibly more concievable the public would picture Tommy ko'ing the not long prior 135 Duran than the guy he actually did KO.

[RoccoMarciano]

Duran clobbers him! Just look at what Hagler did to the spindly legged "Hitman" :)

[divac]

Duran clobbers him! Just look at what Hagler did to the spindly legged "Hitman" :)

Absolutely, but guys like JT done see it.
Hearns imo was alot better fighter at 154 lbs and 160 lbs than he was a welter.

Leonard is a decent puncher, but by not means was he a fighter to have a strong fighter on queer street with a single shot.....
.....and thats exactly what Leonard did to Hearns, in various instances while Hearns was outboxing him, a single shot by Leonard would leave Hearns jello legged in a number of those rounds.

An almost shot Hearns showed years later vs Leonard that he could take his shots much better at 160 lbs!

[RoccoMarciano]

Absolutely, but guys like JT done see it.
Hearns imo was alot better fighter at 154 lbs and 160 lbs than he was a welter.

Leonard is a decent puncher, but by not means was he a fighter to have a strong fighter on queer street with a single shot.....
.....and thats exactly what Leonard did to Hearns, in various instances while Hearns was outboxing him, a single shot by Leonard would leave Hearns jello legged in a number of those rounds.

An almost shot Hearns showed years later vs Leonard that he could take his shots much better at 160 lbs!

Great observations regarding Hearns!

Is that Jim Plunkett (?sp) in your avatar?

[JohnThomas1]

Duran clobbers him! Just look at what Hagler did to the spindly legged "Hitman" :)

:rofl

Well we know one thing, Hearns sure had the power to leave Duran absolutely PRONE! Pity it doesn't go the other way

:good

[divac]

Great observations regarding Hearns!

Is that Jim Plunkett (?sp) in your avatar?

Jim Plunkett!:good

[young griffo]

:rofl

Well we know one thing, Hearns sure had the power to leave Duran absolutely PRONE! Pity it doesn't go the other way

:good
Duran fans are without a doubt the most blindly loyal (to the point of idiocy) of all boxing fans.

You can point out any facts to them about Duran and they can still twist it so their man still comes out looking good ie

You say Hearns destroyed him @154 - (They say he was unfit,unmotivated and didn't rate Hearns so didn't train but there's no evidence that Hearns could do the same @147)

You say Duran quit - (They say he did the honourable thing as he only had a few months to prepare for the rematch which is how Leonard manipulated it as he knew Duran would blow up between fights.Plus he was sick,and Leonard was barely beating him anyway,so he quit thinking he'd get a rubber match quickly only Leonard was such a coward he retired rather than fight Roberto....etc etc)

You say Davey Moore was a novice - (They say he was the best 154 pounder out there who'd fought an exceptional level of opposition in his 12 preceding fights.Also Moore was heavily favoured and Duran was considered washed up but he put on a master class against a much bigger foe who was the best 154 pounder out there)

You say Hagler fought poorly against him - (They say he didn't fight poorly it's just that Duran boxed beautifully and was winning after 12 rounds but got tired late,though the decision was still very close which further proves his greatness)

You say Hearns destroyed him after this great performance the very next fight - (The say he was unfit,unmotivated and didn't rate Hearns so didn't train but there's no evidence.....you get the picture)

Duran's an all time great fighter that's beyond dispute but he wasn't the boxing deity his fans would have you believe.He had his faults and weaknesses like every single boxer before and since and to suggest otherwise doesn't do him or his opposition justice.

[JohnThomas1]

Duran fans are without a doubt the most blindly loyal (to the point of idiocy) of all boxing fans.

You can point out any facts to them about Duran and they can still twist it so their man still comes out looking good ie

You say Hearns destroyed him @154 - (They say he was unfit,unmotivated and didn't rate Hearns so didn't train but there's no evidence that Hearns could do the same @147)

You say Duran quit - (They say he did the honourable thing as he only had a few months to prepare for the rematch which is how Leonard manipulated it as he knew Duran would blow up between fights.Plus he was sick,and Leonard was barely beating him anyway,so he quit thinking he'd get a rubber match quickly only Leonard was such a coward he retired rather than fight Roberto....etc etc)

You say Davey Moore was a novice - (They say he was the best 154 pounder out there who'd fought an exceptional level of opposition in his 12 preceding fights.Also Moore was heavily favoured and Duran was considered washed up but he put on a master class against a much bigger foe who was the best 154 pounder out there)

You say Hagler fought poorly against him - (They say he didn't fight poorly it's just that Duran boxed beautifully and was winning after 12 rounds but got tired late,though the decision was still very close which further proves his greatness)

You say Hearns destroyed him after this great performance the very next fight - (The say he was unfit,unmotivated and didn't rate Hearns so didn't train but there's no evidence.....you get the picture)

Duran's an all time great fighter that's beyond dispute but he wasn't the boxing deity his fans would have you believe.He had his faults and weaknesses like every single boxer before and since and to suggest otherwise doesn't do him or his opposition justice.

I'm hearin' ya!

[My dinner with Conteh]

:rofl

Well we know one thing, Hearns sure had the power to leave Duran absolutely PRONE! Pity it doesn't go the other way

:good



Very true. Duran power at welter was nothing special. He'd have his work cut out here, I agree with the posters who say the fight will be a bit different. Tommy will work behind the raking jab which Duran will find extremely difficult to get under, but being the skilled fighter he was he will get inside more and attack the ribs but I see Hearns landing the bomb nonetheless, not for a brutal KO like in 1984 but enough to put Duran down, then let fly until the ref's intervention. Hearns power was seldom more evident than it was at 147, despite what people want to believe. The 154 version has the edge as an all-round fighter, but anyone that thinks the 160 chinny, weak-legged version was an improvement is just deluded. These men at middle took his shots much better than those at welterweight. Tommy's record at 147 is excellent, except for his last couple of rounds in 1981.

Hearns TKO 7. Cards at time of stoppage. 58-56.

[Arminius]

Roberto Duran being knocked out by anyone in 1980 is ludicrous. He slipped punches like very few could. He had an iron jaw and would wear Hearns down in the late rounds.

[Robbi]

Very true. Duran power at welter was nothing special.

I don't think Duran's power was special at lightweight either. He did stop many challengers throughout his lightweight reign, but mostly all his stoppages came after 10 rounds. I'm not saying his power wasn't good, but it certainly doesn't live up to the hype that some people give it. Jackson, Hearns, and Tyson, were much harder hitters in their prime than Duran at lightweight.

Duran would wait until fatigue took its toll on his opponents, then his knockouts were ruthless and savage.

[Robbi]

Roberto Duran being knocked out by anyone in 1980 is ludicrous. He slipped punches like very few could. He had an iron jaw and would wear Hearns down in the late rounds.

Duran never shared a ring with anyone like Hearns' power up until they fought. And I include Leonard at welterweight, and Hagler at middleweight. I will give Duran some benefit of the doubt, he was slightly weakened when he fought Hearns as he took large chunks of weight off three weeks before the fight. Rumour has it he came down from 180lbs.

But Hearns at welterweight was a serious ombre with his right hand. Duran's sharpness and elusiveness would simply make him last longer. But he'd only be delaying the inevitable for a few rounds.

Hearns just kills Duran from the outside.


Hearns KO8.

[divac]

Duran never shared a ring with anyone like Hearns' power up until they fought. And I include Leonard at welterweight, and Hagler at middleweight. I will give Duran some benefit of the doubt, he was slightly weakened when he fought Hearns as he took large chunks of weight off three weeks before the fight. Rumour has it he came down from 180lbs.

But Hearns at welterweight was a serious ombre with his right hand. Duran's sharpness and elusiveness would simply make him last longer. But he'd only be delaying the inevitable for a few rounds.

Hearns just kills Duran from the outside.


Hearns KO8.Those were not rumors that Duran overweight with just 2 or 3 weeks.
I was reading newspapers back in the day, and the reports were that Duran looked slow in sparring and in horrific shape for a man that was supposed to face Tommy Hearns in a matter of a couple of weeks.

Call them excuses if you will, but media reports prior to the fight happening were that Duran in the weeks leading to the fight would have a battle trying to get down to 154 lbs.

I believe Duran would have gotten stopped by Hearns even if he was in tip top shape, but the fact that Duran had to take off so much weight did'nt help his chances what so ever and got him KTFO in the fashion that he did.

[JohnThomas1]

Very true. Duran power at welter was nothing special. He'd have his work cut out here, I agree with the posters who say the fight will be a bit different. Tommy will work behind the raking jab which Duran will find extremely difficult to get under, but being the skilled fighter he was he will get inside more and attack the ribs but I see Hearns landing the bomb nonetheless, not for a brutal KO like in 1984 but enough to put Duran down, then let fly until the ref's intervention. Hearns power was seldom more evident than it was at 147, despite what people want to believe. The 154 version has the edge as an all-round fighter, but anyone that thinks the 160 chinny, weak-legged version was an improvement is just deluded. These men at middle took his shots much better than those at welterweight. Tommy's record at 147 is excellent, except for his last couple of rounds in 1981.

Hearns TKO 7. Cards at time of stoppage. 58-56.

Nice post, what else need be said. Good to see you have eased into stoppage mode, you were leaning toward a decision about 12 months back. The 154 Hearns was a better fighter but he still had that power at 147.

[Duodenum]

The premise of this whole thread is rather ludicrous. Put this in MSG, sign up Johnny LoBianco as the referee, and I'll take Duran by lethal bodyblow, around the end of round 13.:|

[C. M. Clay II]

The end result would be the same. Duran's just too short and would not be able to get inside. Hearns would play with the little fellow at any stage of their careers.:good

[Arminius]

:rofl

Well we know one thing, Hearns sure had the power to leave Duran absolutely PRONE! Pity it doesn't go the other way

:good

Let's put this into context. Duran had 82 fights when he fought Hearns. Hearns had 39. Hearns has currently 67 fights. Let's see where he stands when fighting a fellow great fighter after 15 more fights.

After just 47 fights he was floored by Barkley.

Add that Hearns was fighting at an ideal weight for himself while Duran was 2 full divisions heavier than his natural weight.

Furthermore, I'd like to see how Tommy would follow up a match with a Hagler like opponent after 80 plus fights.

1980 would have been entirely different at welter or middle weight. There would be no knockout by Hearns and Duran would win by late KO or decision.

[NickHudson]

I agree these issues relating to relative stage of career do tend to get swept under the carpet.

However, whether a 1980 showdown swings it enough in Duran's direction is tough to call.

If I could make one fantasy fight come true, I would consider this one very seriously, beautiful styles matchup.

If it goes past 8, I pick Duran - but whether he can get to 8 without getting mashed would be a terrific challenge and test his defensive prowess to the full...

Let's put this into context. Duran had 82 fights when he fought Hearns. Hearns had 39. Hearns has currently 67 fights. Let's see where he stands when fighting a fellow great fighter after 15 more fights.

After just 47 fights he was floored by Barkley.

Add that Hearns was fighting at an ideal weight for himself while Duran was 2 full divisions heavier than his natural weight.

Furthermore, I'd like to see how Tommy would follow up a match with a Hagler like opponent after 80 plus fights.

1980 would have been entirely different at welter or middle weight. There would be no knockout by Hearns and Duran would win by late KO or decision.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Nice post, what else need be said. Good to see you have eased into stoppage mode, you were leaning toward a decision about 12 months back. The 154 Hearns was a better fighter but he still had that power at 147.


Yeah, I initially thought about a decision but lean towards the stoppage. I don't think Duran can have anywhere near the same success getting inside against Tommy as he did with Leonard.

[JohnThomas1]

Let's put this into context. Duran had 82 fights when he fought Hearns. Hearns had 39. Hearns has currently 67 fights. Let's see where he stands when fighting a fellow great fighter after 15 more fights.


I'd hardly call that context. I can't see any relevance in it whatsoever apart from concession making for Duran. It has so many variables and holes i don't know where to start.

After just 47 fights he was floored by Barkley.

Hearns was stopped by Leonard waaaay before Barkley, and Hagler as well. You are comparing apples with oranges, Hearns isn't the guy with the rock solid (and even better really) chin over 90 odd fights and 5 divisions. Simply look at Durans durability before Haearns, and after. Things become very clear very quickly.

Add that Hearns was fighting at an ideal weight for himself while Duran was 2 full divisions heavier than his natural weight.

Yeah, and Hagler was fighting at his perfect weight too and Duran 3 (a logical count would be 4, and against Hearns 3) full divisions heavier than his natural weight. Didn't stop the wares and class of Duran getting him thru 15. Rather than make excuses for Duran lets give Hearns some credit for his actual achievement here.

Furthermore, I'd like to see how Tommy would follow up a match with a Hagler like opponent after 80 plus fights.

Well lets throw relevance totally out the window and compare Robinson and Duran quantity wise. How does Duran compare to Hopkins at 40 years of age? Apples to oranges.

1980 would have been entirely different at welter or middle weight. There would be no knockout by Hearns and Duran would win by late KO or decision.

That's your opinion and i totally disagree. One of us is wrong and one right. Which one is anybodies guess.

[My dinner with Conteh]

1980 would have been entirely different at welter or middle weight. There would be no knockout by Hearns and Duran would win by late KO or decision.


Does this include light-middleweight?

[Duodenum]

One of us is wrong and one right. Which one is anybodies guess.Naw, you're both wrong. Duran/Hearns in 1980 would have been a draw.:smoke

[JimboDs]

Duran would have likely lost to Hearns in any year at that weight. That's my opinion and I'm a huge Duran guy.

Also, it doesn't mean that Hearns was a better fighter than Duran. I stronly believe that he never was. However, as others have said, this was Hearns natural weight at the pinnacle of his career, which didn't last that long. Duran was a natural lightweight and carved a path of destruction through that division for almost 12 years before moving up.

I agree that Duran was not the same fighter in 84 than he was in 80 by any means, but I have a difficult time seeing him overcoming a prime Hearns physical attributes (height, reach, natural power, speed) at that weight at any point in time. It would be like a prime Roy Jones trying to get into the ring with a prime George Foreman.

[divac]

Duran would have likely lost to Hearns in any year at that weight. That's my opinion and I'm a huge Duran guy.

Also, it doesn't mean that Hearns was a better fighter than Duran. I stronly believe that he never was. However, as others have said, this was Hearns natural weight at the pinnacle of his career, which didn't last that long. Duran was a natural lightweight and carved a path of destruction through that division for almost 12 years before moving up.

I agree that Duran was not the same fighter in 84 than he was in 80 by any means, but I have a difficult time seeing him overcoming a prime Hearns physical attributes (height, reach, natural power, speed) at that weight at any point in time. It would be like a prime Roy Jones trying to get into the ring with a prime George Foreman.

I agree, 154 lbs would have been too much for Duran to overcome against Hearns, but the thread title suggest the 1980 version of Duran, with the fight taking place at 147 lbs against the Ethiopian type body of Tommy Hearns.

[JohnThomas1]

Naw, you're both wrong. Duran/Hearns in 1980 would have been a draw.:smoke

Hahaha, ya bugger!

[Robbi]

Very true. Duran power at welter was nothing special. He'd have his work cut out here, I agree with the posters who say the fight will be a bit different. Tommy will work behind the raking jab which Duran will find extremely difficult to get under, but being the skilled fighter he was he will get inside more and attack the ribs but I see Hearns landing the bomb nonetheless, not for a brutal KO like in 1984 but enough to put Duran down, then let fly until the ref's intervention. Hearns power was seldom more evident than it was at 147, despite what people want to believe. The 154 version has the edge as an all-round fighter, but anyone that thinks the 160 chinny, weak-legged version was an improvement is just deluded. These men at middle took his shots much better than those at welterweight. Tommy's record at 147 is excellent, except for his last couple of rounds in 1981.

Hearns TKO 7. Cards at time of stoppage. 58-56.

Agreed. More or less the same as my earlier post. Duran's sharpness and speed combined with his better upperbody movement just delays the inevitable.

Hearns KO8.

[Robbi]

Another key weapon for Hearns if and when Duran gets past his jab, the right uppercut.

[Duodenum]

Hahaha, ya bugger!Hey, Saturday Night, Scotch Sours, yah, I'm feein' flip! (Drinking and posting. I should have my posting privileges suspended for a year.)

[JimboDs]

I agree, 154 lbs would have been too much for Duran to overcome against Hearns, but the thread title suggest the 1980 version of Duran, with the fight taking place at 147 lbs against the Ethiopian type body of Tommy Hearns.

Okay, I missed the 147 part. Might be a different fight then. I still see Duran having trouble with the height and reach given Hearns' speed, but it's an interesting 'what if?'.

Hearns didn't have an iron jaw so it's very possible that he could be knocked out against a Duran capable of getting inside.

Either way one guy is going to be taken out of his element no matter how you match these guys up. I don't think anyone can seriously say Duran wasn't clearly the better p4p fighter in his prime.

[JohnThomas1]

Hey, Saturday Night, Scotch Sours, yah, I'm feein' flip! (Drinking and posting. I should have my posting privileges suspended for a year.)

I had that last night. Upper shelf Crown Golds and Jimmy Beam bourbon cans. Life was indeed beatiful and i even kept in check lol

[Duodenum]

I had that last night. Upper shelf Crown Golds and Jimmy Beam bourbon cans. Life was indeed beatiful and i even kept in check lolAh, a person of true taste and distinction. (I'd be ashamed to tell you what rot I was disguising the flavour of.)

[baddest]

I still have Hearns winning this. Duran in Montreal was one of the most beautiful performances I've witnessed but it's not enough for Duran in this encounter. His slickness and jaw should see him do much better against Hearns than falling face first in the first 2 rounds but I still see him losing here because hearns rapier Jab is one of the hardest things to get inside of, especially with that dangerous overhand right waiting behind it, and while I could see Duran getting inside eventually, I can't see him sustaining enough of a body attack to hurt Hearns enough to knock him out. I don't think Duran had the punch @ 147, and I think Hearns had enough boxing ability to be able to escape from any danger a midget could throw at him. Duran gets knocked out inside of 10 rounds I think. Just not KTFO

[laxpdx]

Duran would have much more respect for Hearns than he did Leonard, as Tommy had the power and range to take him out. However, he also had stamina problems, which was all too evident at 147. Hearns' skeletal-like build here wouldn't serve him well either. Duran on the other hand was much sharper at 147. Any weight above that and he becomes the epitome of inconsistent. Hearns demonstrated the "cold" part in 1984.

I see Duran being extremely careful and smartly slipping and then countering, and Hearns fades as it goes into the late rounds. As Hearns fatigues, Duran turns it up...and gets the late-round TKO.

[DDDUUDDDEE]

Hearns would always beat Duran, Foreman would always beat Frazier, Ronald Reagan hated black people... life goes on.

[Foreman Hook]

Hearns would always kill him. Just like Foreman & Frazier.

:thumbsup


Or Foreman And Tyson. :hey:hey

[MAG1965]

Hearns of 1984 was much more experienced than 1980. He had fought Cuevas,Benitez, and Leonard, the same guys Duran had fought since going to welt. Hearns of 1980 I think would have won but more of a TKO stoppage on cuts than the way it ended in 1984. Hearns of 1984 had all the advantages over Duran. Speed,Power and he was experienced. Nothing Duran could exploit as he liked to do to opponents.

[Pachilles]

What more can you do against Duran to be chosen over him hypothetically? More than completely and utterly dominate and destroy him in 2 rounds, in real life, it seems

[Beeston Brawler]

As an aside, it's worth noting that Emanuel Steward was an assistant coach to the 1984 Olympic squad.

From memory he said that camp was the best he'd ever had with any fighter..... Tommy had the chance to work with Evander Holyfield, Pernell Whitaker, Mark Breland and Meldrick Taylor - compared to those guys, Duran was like fighting molasses.

It's a strange thing with Duran though how (according to some fans) he went from being prime to being shot, then near prime again...... he's not Godzilla, is he?

As a few people have mentioned in this thread, there are tools that Tommy has, either in 1980, 1984 or whenever you like, that he could use to offset what Duran brings..... and it would generally result in an early KO for Tommy.

It wasn't as if it was a lucky punch, Hearns was looking to set Duran up for that shot from the first bell, Duran did well to survive the 1st round :lol: