Who had the better defense: Roberto Durán or Pernell Whitaker?

Hearns is a spooky looking cat and Duran definitely felt uneasy at their initial meeting and after that KO.

 

He had that cold death stare did Hearns. Duran could have snarled and threatened all he wanted but it wouldn't have mattered.
That ko of Duran is one of the most impressive in the lower weights of the 80 s.

 

Whitaker had a more well-rounded and multi-faceted defense.

But Duran for an aggressive fighter, top notch. And Duran could stand off his opponent and show great defense without even being too aggressive. Like he did in the De Jesus III and Hagler fights.

 

God, that was probably the worst argument I've even had on this forum. Why was this bumped? To embarrass us?

 

Whitaker didn't fight Hearns so we can't say he wouldn't get KOd.

 

I'd have to see SweetPea stand right on top of Sugar Ray Leonard as he fired off his cannons and make him miss 5 out of 5 punches for basically 15 rounds.
That was perhaps the most impressive display of defense in boxing history considering Duran was giving up height and was on the attack at the same time.

 

I always was fascinated by Duran being intimidated by Hearns! Duran's snarling, street tough, never back down persona was his trademark image-but Hearns had a glowering menace about him (especially in his peak years) that could spook anyone--even a fighter like Roberto Duran!

PS--That "aura" of Hearns was one of the reasons why to this day he's my 2nd all-time favorite fighter (next to "Smokin Joe")--the "Hit Man" was the embodiment of bad a$$ swag!!

 

Yep Frazier and Duran both had that hit you till you die mentality

 

Jeez, talk about exaggerating. Can’t take anything away from Duran’s defensive performance in Montreal but you have certainly gave it an artificial coating.

 

What round was that? I wanna see that

 

What round was that? Apparently he did it for the entire 15 rounds. I must’ve missed the real version of Leonard-Duran I.

Look: “fired off his cannons and make him miss 5 out of 5 punches for basically 15 rounds..”

 

I am going to have to say DURAN. Whitaker was flashier but who fought well past their prime into their forties thanks to being able to minimize the punishment they took ? Duran.

 

Whitaker is clear of Duran defensively, but Duran is the much better P4P fighter.

 

If both were at their best an in their primes at lightweight an most people think it would be a close fight no matter who you favour to win how do you work out that Duran is the much better p4p fighter?

 

Different styles and approaches to the game, plus Pete being a raging drug taker towards end of the career has a huge hit on career longevity.

Duran was able to carry weight better as he got older, in addition to adapting better with the loss of physical gifts.

Defence is footwork and ring placement - Pete was more elusive on the back foot, but crossed his feet and was prone to flash knock downs when off balance. Commentators referred to this flaw in a couple of his fights - he avoided a lot of punches using a herky jerky squatting, leg movement focused defence. Duran could equally squat with aplomb but often left himself with better balance and in position to counter better than Pete did.

Defence is glove placement, parrying and catching shots - Pete and Duran were excellent at this. Duran did things on the inside that Pete didn't do - under hooks and overhooks, framing and arm and elbow manipulation to trap the opponent's hitting arm, whilst delivering his shots, blocking opponent's counters mid combination and continuing his barrages.

Pete's defence here was likely not as subtle as Duran's but more in your face.

Defence is head movement - both fighters are really good at taking their head off the centre line whilst throwing shots; both superb at slipping and ducking shots. With Pete's more squatty, athletic style, it stands out more and he could be guilty of admiring his defence at time. Lots of head movement, slips, squats, dancing away from danger without firing return. Duran has a sequence in Montreal where he is slipping, ducking and weaving a Leonard flurry up close, whilst on the front foot. Technically, this is harder to do so I give more kudos to the Durans, Armstrongs, Qawis, Fraziers, Tysons etc. doing it on the front foot as opposed to doing it on the backfoot but not in position to make them miss and make them pay.

Defence is reflexive manoeuvres - Pete is emphasised, Duran is subtle. Duran looks like he's getting his head spun off his shoulders but he's rolling shots with superb timing, Pete combines reflex with his legs and so you can see the juking and ducking, slipping and perpetual motion when avoiding ODLH, JLR etc.

Pete just looked it defensively, but Duran despite not being as emphasised probably displays a higher degree of difficulty as a front foot fighter who arguably has more defensive nuance, but might not be as defensively consistent. It's a lot closer than some may realise - elite fighter versus elite fighter, Duran's level of defence, styles considered, is harder to achieve IMO.