Which Duran was better? '83 vs. Hagler or '89 vs. Barkley?

He made it a pretty close fight against a still close to prime Hagler, and not to mention being 6 years younger than in the Barkley fight. So I might go with Duran of 1983 as opposed to Duran of 1989.

 

I guess you'd have to go with the younger version who kept the best middleweight in the world honest throughout.

But I'm picking the older version that fought Barkley. My reasons are that although Barkley fought the kind of war Duran could conceivably win, Duran had to be damn near perfect to beat a highly-motivated, huge middleweight who probably never saw a better night in his life.
With Hagler, the fight was a technical chessmatch and Hagler didn't press too hard. But Duran had to fight Barkley, and that massive hook he absorbed in the 8th which spun him half around would have floored almost anyone else.
Put it this way: he had to overcome more adversity against Iran as opposed to his fight with Marvin.
So yeah, '83 Duran was probably a better fighter, but '89 Duran showed me more and hence impressed me more.

 

An interesting look on things. I guess there's no wrong answer here, but I guess the determining factor is your views on Barkley as a fighter. His resume is lacking in terms of quality wins and he did have the perfect style to beat Tommy. Not an all and out brawler, but he hit hard, has a come forward style, has a very good chin. He's also the sort of fighter that would wear his opponent down and come on strong later in the fight. But couldn't do it to someone of
Duran's quality despite having youth heavily on his side, makes you question if he could go to a plan B, as in essence he did fight Duran's fight.

It also puts Hagler's victory over Duran into perspective, as he managed what Barkley couldn't 6 years later. Then again I guess it's unfair to compare Barkley to Hagler. Not to undermine Barkley's career, but one is an ATG one on the weaker end of the lineal belt holders at the weight

If we look at it from a H2H pov, I guess I'd take the Duran of 83 though

 

I go for this version of Duran too. For the same reasons

 

Excellent response. The one key difference may be conditioning. During the Barkley fight Gil Clancy commented that when he spoke to Duran about the Hagler fight, Duran said he just gassed out in the final rounds and couldn't keep up the pace, safe to say that didn't happen in the Barkley fight. The one thing about the Barkley fight that sets it apart in my opinion is that Duran had to use all the boxing knowledge and technique he ever learned in overcome the all the advantages Barkley had, in addition, he displayed more determination and outright guts than almost anyone who ever stepped into the ring.

Against Hagler I didn't see all those forces at work. But he probably had better defensive skills at that time.

 

Duran would sporadically have a great fight from time to time. I think the thing was it was hard for him to maintain consistent condition and would fall off big because of his life style

I think he used his bag of tricks well in both fights but fizzled at the end of the Hagler fight 15 rds but sparkled at the end of the Barkley fight 12 rds. I think both fights were good but the way he won the Barkley fight was impressive.

You got to remember Duran's natural weight was 135lbs and he was still great at 147 vs Leonard 1st fight . I think despite his not always top condition to get into condition he proved he was better than Hagler and Barkley on a lb 4 lb level, both fights were classic but Barkley was a win

 

Great post!

I like Duran in the Robbie Simms fight as well. he lost because he did not have the condition. He was starting to dismantle Simms but the enegry gave out and he lost a close one. Almost the same fight with Hagler. Hagler could not figure him out...Barkley had him but Duran was special that night.

 

SURPRISINGLY Duran showed much better stamina in the Barkley fight 6 years later which he did not show in an earlier fight vs Simms

so I think it was Duran in Duran vs Barkley

 

Terrific post .. Hagler's chief weakness , even in his prime was a bit of a lack of self confidence .. he did not go balls to the wall against Vito the first time and even thought he deserved the decision he got screwed more because of what he did not do which was impress .. he did the same against Duran .. I think Marvin had stamina concerns .. if you watch his first fight against Fully Obel ha came dangerously close to punching himself out ala W. Klitschko and it was a concerned he carried with him .. when highly motivated as against Minter, Vito 2, Hamsho 2 and Hearns he was devastating .. no doubt Duran put on a more immersive performance against the best Barkley ever but there is no way I think the 39 version was better than the 32 year old version .. the 32 was better but the 39 year old put on the greater show ..

 

I pick the '83 version...but this is very good post!:good

 

83 - Duran without doubt, he really pushed Hagler in that fight...

I don't know what happened to Duran during the next 6 months, because in mid 84, he looked flat, and was beaten to a pulp against Hearns...

 

Good question, Sal.

I see it maybe a little differently than most. The last time Duran was in the kind of condition he was in against Hagler, was when he was in against Leonard 1. He never got near that again. The weight was the same (156 1/2), but at 37, the body was different than it was at 32. He was pretty ripped against Hagler and Duran was rarely ripped after lightweight.

The other thing is that Duran actually wasn't Duran after 29 when he wasn't motivated by glory. His record proves that. They used to say "Duran is Duran" and it sounded nice but it wasn't really true in the 80s. Had Duran defeated Hagler (and there is a chance he would have stolen that bout had it gone 12 rounds, given Hagler's own faults as a fighter), he would have launched himself up around Armstrong or beyond in a P4P greatness sense.

Hagler got tired after 12 rounds with Hagler because he was in the pocket or one step out the whole fight. Hagler's hands are heavy. Ever get hit by someone repeatedly with heavy hands? It's a taste of hell and those ropes they close in. Duran was also forced to think -Hagler's ambidextrous style confused him and he admitted that. I also believe that Hagler was physically stronger than Barkley, which is going to drain strength. Then you have the anguish that any fighter would feel when Hagler is coming, coming, coming and you can't dent him.

Duran's performance against Hagler was shockingly un-Duran-like. I think it was genius.

Against Barkley, he wasn't better -how could he be at 37 after 22 years as a pro and damn-near 100 fights? He was completely outgunned, sure, and it was one of the great wins I've ever seen. Remember the stand-off? Duran looked like a little keg looking up at a tree.

It was Barkley's best showing in a technical sense and Barkley actually did everything right. Think about that. What did Barkley do wrong in that bout? He fought Duran the way he should have! And it wasn't enough.

In the end, it was like Duran beat Grendel, but Grendel over 12 is a whole lot easier than Hagler over 15.