Redeeming a Demon: Moore vs Duran

That fight is one of the most brutal beat downs in the history of the sport. Moore comes in a considerable favourite based on his destruction of Kalule and Duran looking somewhat washed up in previous fights with Laing and Benitez but boy were they wrong.

Duran had beat up Cuevas the fight before but similar things were being said of Cuevas as Duran due them both being in upset of the year back to back (Cuevas to Stafford).

I don't think Moore really recovered and never looked the same, an impressive two round stoppage of Benetez aside.

One of Duran finest victories. A Lacy'ing before it existed.

 

As I posted in the other Duran thread, Moore might have been something great if he hadn't run into Duran at that stage of his career. Unfortunately for him RD was in imperious mood, he'd refound his form and he took Moore apart like a watch. At first with a screwdriver, and then with a mallet.

 

Definitely one of the fights which showed how great Duran was.

 

Duran is my all time favourite.
I have watched Duran-Moore and Duran-Barkley more than any other fights.

 

good fights, too bad Duran could not have beaten the elites Benitez,Hearns and Hagler at those weights.

 

You seems to be a Duran detractor lol..
Like Bernard Hopkins, Duran had a way to lessen the effect of his losses.
Hopkins lost to Taylor but he bested his conquered in Pavlik, lost to Jones but beat Tarver.
Similarly, Duran had win over the conquerer of the 3 fighters you listed above.
Not to mentioned those 3 are fighters of the 80's and Duran was actually from the 70's and has over 70 fights at his best weight. His legacy was set prior meeting those elite bigger guys.

 

Duran detractor? No, I just want to say how I think it is. He gets huge credit for those Moore and Barkley wins, but when it is said he lost to Benitez and Hearns at 154 rather easily, he all of a sudden becomes washed up and old. When he really was not that old. Duran was from the 1970s? Who says? Hopkins was from the 1990s. That is just something to say ,but he fought well in 1980 and his biggest win was in 1980. Hearns beat Hill in 1991 and he was from the 1980 I suppose. His legacy was set, but being part of the fab 4 regardless of the losses makes Duran's legacy much greater. He will always be talked about which is fine. If he was in range of anyone even Tyson, he has a chance to win if he can take the punches.

 

Well to say he losses to those fighters because he was washed up would be erroneus. But we can chalked them up as stylistical disadvantages for Duran. To be fair, everybody in the fab 4 plus Benitez are arguably The very best of their weight classes or at least top 3 All Time. Duran is the smallest and oldest of them all. The losses count but historically, most celebrate highest win and accomplishment when analysing all time great ranking rather than focus on the losses, thats why Duran is so highly revered.
If he had beaten Benitez and Hearns and just draw to Hagler, even SRR has to take a backseat in the GOAT discussion.

 

Brilliant... worth a look just for,

"He enjoyed being feared. He worked his hardest and devoted himself to being feared since he was 8 years old. He devoted 38 years of his life to it. Professionally. His first fight was before the moon landing. His last fight was 2 months before 9/11. He lives for this."

 

It's high but not that high.
1.Thrilla in Manilla
2.The Battle of the Champions
3.Moore vs Durelle 1
4.The War
5.The Fight of the Century
6.The Brawl in Montreal
7.Chacon vs Limon 4
8.Marquez vs Vazquez 3
9.For Honor and Pride
10.The Showdown
11.Gatti vs Ward 1
12.Zale vs Marciano 3
13.Chacon vs Edwards 2
14.Basilio vs Robinson 1
15.Pep vs Saddler 4
16.Basilio vs Fullmer
17.Matthew Muhammad vs Johnson 1
18.Matthew Muhammad vs Johnson 2
19.Marciano vs Charles 1
20.Holyfield vs Bowe 2

 

I agree. Had he beaten them it would have been huge. As it is I give Duran credit for fighting all of them and he hit Hearns with 2 rights hand in that fight which were solid, even in the 2 round knockoutloss. Yes he was at a disadvantage in someways but that is Duran's fight also and with the high ranking he gets, he could have overcome them perhaps. He was not washed up and the way he fought Barkley in 1989 was proof of that. He was not washed up in 1995 when he fought Camacho and Pazienza in those years and was fighting on USA. He lost to Joppy because he was just old and slow and Joppy was fast. But I never saw him as washed up really. He always had spirit for fighting. That was one of his greatest abilities spirit and knowing when he found a key to go and execute the key to winning. The way guys beat Duran was to do what they had to do and totally neutralize him and not just a little. That is why the Moore fight in round one Moore gave up a lot to brawl with Duran. Hit him hard but Duran was still there. You don't give Duran those punches. Ray did in 1980 and was quick and great enough to brawl with Duran and still just lose a decision. Ray knew you had to fight your fight against Duran and not give him any hope or keys to victory. Anyone who beats Duran has to stay our of his range. Hagler was in his range and Duran took his punches, so that is why Marvin struggled. Marvin also did not do what he had to do by backing up Duran and making it a more aggressive fight. He fought passively and let Duran into that fight.

 

You don't think he had anything to do with those do you?