Barkley vs. Duran

He was in great condition for Leonard. I don't think he weighed a pound over 145 for that fight though. He looked far worse against Zeferino Gonzalez at 149.

That's today though. They didn't have a day to put on weight back then. And I think Hopkins weighing 156 was in his contract. A better comparison might be DLH-Sturm (160+added weight) & DLH-Hopkins (155). Oscar was certainly in better shape for Hopkins.

Duran was only ever drained because he got terribly overweight in between fights and took fights without proper notice. This doesn't mean he was too big for 154, 147 or 135 even. He just didn't have the training habits of a Bernard Hopkins.

 

Since when is "solid muscle" good for boxing? You want to be lean. That's why muscle heads can't fight.

If Duran was a natural welterweight, why didn't he take on John Stracey in 1975 instead of the far more formidable Ray Leonard? The fact is he peaked against Leonard, but he was competing in a division 12 pounds north of his own and was in there against....ready.... a natural welterweight! Duran was utterly physically outgunned against Leonard and the whole world knew it. To argue otherwise is revisionism. When was he utterly physically outgunned as a lightweight? Never. Why? Because he's a natural lightweight!

 

Ray Robinson was not a natural lightweight.

Holman Williams was not a natural lightweight.

Cocoa Kid was not a natural lightweight.

Jose Napoles was not a natural lightweight.

Oscar De La Hoya was not a natural lightweight.

The idea that Floyd or Pernell or even Armstrong would go 15 with Hagler and beat a 6'1 Iran Barkley who was probably stronger than even Hagler is not serious.

 

There are guys who will tell you that the 25 year old jr. welterweight who can't stay in the division when he is 32 is, in the end, lazy. I think that Mickey Ward said that. I don't totally agree with it, but there is a point to it.

Duran walked around at 150 lbs as a lightweight because he was a glutton. James Toney walked around at 190 lbs as a middleweight because he had an eating disorder.

Now take a look at guys like Marvin Hagler. He came in at something 159 1/4 for years. What's the difference...?

It seems clear when you think about it.

These guys gain weight by design. They're chasing money, or glory, or tin belts, or the all-you-can-eat $10 buffet at Denny's.

 

Especially at 37 years old.

 

Hagler didn't fight Duran to knock him out. He fought relaxed like he was apprehensive!!!! Had he fought aggressively he would have stopped Duran about round 6 probably. He wouldn't have stopped him in 2 like Thomas Hearns did, but he would have stopped him. And Barkley? Good fighter but beatable. Why are people giving Duran excuses????? Anyone else in boxing losses and they live with it. Duran excuses are he didn't train or he was not a natural this or that. Most fighters move up or have injuries. So what!!! Duran did lose to Hearns and Benitez in wipeouts in those same years and no one seems to say anything about that.

 

Natural lightweights? :think

:rofl neither of them sees round 15 against Hagler, not even Armstrong.

Gans might pull that off that I think.

Yawn .... :dead

 

Man you need to watch more Hagler bouts apart from Hagler vs Hearns.

Hagler did not have the one punch power that Hearns had, who Duran is made to order for.

Duran had a full carrer before he stepped up to WW.

 

All of them fought at LW for several years, Napoles was near the LW limit until the age of 28, that makes him a smaller man than Duran, he just never got his shot at the LW title.

All of them could have kept at the LW longer if they drained down like Duran did, if they had a world title to defend, but they didn't have the same incentive, Robinson should have been LW champion himself

Armstrong's performance against Garcia is possibly better than Duran's performance against a WEIGHT DRAINED Barkley. I think Barkley being dead at the weight need's highlighting, as you Duran apologists don't count wins over weight drained fighters. I mean seriously where's the consistency in your arguments?

Mayweather/Whitaker aren't as big/strong as Duran so they may not hold them off, but they both beat top 154lb champions and Mayweather beat a MW titlist himself in DLH. They possibly could pull off the same feats, Barkley had allot of issues with defensive skilled boxers, Hagler himself may have had a few issues chasing them down

Functional muscle has always been good for boxing, which is what Duran gained, he wasn't doing dumbell curls to bulk up FFS he gained strength while maintaining his speed. Every boxer who has moved up has aimed to gain functional muscle since Jack Johnsons time.

Why do you think he was stronger than Leonard? Because he gained strength when growing into the WW frame

I don't know why he didn't fight Stracey, he probably would have if he got offered money for the fight

So what if they could have stayed at the weight, it doesn't mean that gaining weight doesn't help a fighter, they maybe less drained, stronger, faster at a higher weight and benefit from the added muscle. Hopkins could have stayed at MW for longer but he's certainly benefited from going up 2 weight classes, the extra muscle he gained to be a 185lb man (his ring weight). Patterson said he force fed himself to carry 180lbs otherwise he'd have been a MW, he carried the 180-190lb weight just fine

 

Oh my :roll: PP ....

 

Again, none of them were natural lightweights.

Again, lightweight Robinson was just a kid and still filling out, much like Duran at featherweight.

Duran did not "drain down" at lightweight.

Come on, man. Ceferino Garcia? You mean that 5'6, 33 year old welterweight that Armstrong already beat in '38? Come on, man.

Barkley dead at the weight? His performance in that bout was probably his best. Dead at the weight? You're looking at the Benn fight and applying it all wrong.

What's a "titlist"? That term means nothing to me. I don't care one bit about that silly, meaningless tin belt that Duran took from Barkley. I do care that he had enough to beat Barkley who had just stopped Hearns. If you are not impressed by that feat then you are far more biased than any Duran apologist.

And De La Hoya was no more of a middleweight than Garcia.

Notice that they have to work to gain weight instead of work to lose weight -which is what you do when you are trimming down to your natural division.

ISure he gained strength. But since when is boxing a test of strength?

Hopkins. A natural middleweight. Period.

Patterson. There is an argument that says that Patterson would have been far more effective and better had he fought as a light heavyweight. And poorer. Which is yet another point.

 

What a load of dog turds.

Hagler: "I liked Duran so I decided not to knock him out"

 

what does it have to do with liking it has to do with style? Hagler fought relaxed thinking Duran was going to be a push over and would fight aggressive. He was planning on counterpunching and winning easily. HE still won easily!! It was Hagler's fault and nothing Duran did great. Hagler made the same mistake when he fought Antuofermo in 79!!! The load is ignoring Duran being destroyed by Hearns and easily beaten up by Benitez in favor of losing to Hagler (he still lost)and beating a inexpeirienced Davey Moore!! Be as fair to every fighter as you are to Duran and no one really would be blamed for losing!!!!!

 

Just got done rewatching this one and rescoring it. Initially I had it a draw, but 3 rounds marked close, so I went back to review those 3. After reviewing them intently, I had Duran by a point, although it's close enough and with enough rounds that could slide either way that I can see either guy winning by a point or two, or a draw.

 

If it only was just that , Duran thumbed Davey Moore whom BTW also came in2 their fight out of a jaw surgery which came as result of injury during sparing . These r d 2 decisive causes 2 Duran's "win" vs Moore .