kenny was a great fighter but he got manhandled by duran. anyone claiming he was a simple brawler should watch the fight; he cut off the ring beautifully, showed speed in movement and punches and was as tenacious as any fighter ever. A rematch would have ended quicker
Duran has probably the most under-rated defence of all-time. People look at him and think he's a Margarito type brawler who blocks shots with primarily with his face. The way he could defend himself on the inside and still be in a position to constantly though power punches from a balanced position with great angles was exceptional.
i go on about the barkely performance because it was a post peak duran but still legendary effort. a big part is his defense. after that MONSTEROUS hook he took in, i think, the 2nd round he began rolling with the punches, slipping when he worked his way in and basically making Iran through a lot without hit much. He had a great way of deflecting just enough of the punch to avoid punishment but leave his opponents open and vulnerable, where he could walk them down or counter at will
The Barkley fight was a masterful performance against a guy fresh off a TKO3 win over Tommy Hearns. Given that Duran was past his prime and 25lbs above his best weight.
Duran at his best had one of the best defences of all time, period. Especially when considering how effectively he was able to use it with his aggressive style, and in sync with his offense. Duran was one of the most skilled technicians of all time flat out.
Buchanan actually fought a helluva fight,but he was always fighting under pressure in there simply to survive.
exactly, against any other fighter that night Ken by UD. But duran was waaaaay too physical and agressive for him
When I first watched Duran, I just thought he was nothing special. Very wreckless and untidy on the eye. And this was when I viewed the first Leonard fight. However, my eyes began to tell me things he was doing in there that previously went unnoticed. He was probably the best defensive aggressor of all-time. Anyone who takes a prime Hagler 15 rounds, 25lbs above his best weight, must have ring sense.
see that is the problem with duran fans, you guys want to big up his victories and discount his losses like they didn't happen. that is not logival it is borderline ******ed..and only duran fans do this. you don't see tyson fans acting like mike didn't lose to buster douglas, you dopn't see pac fans acting like pac nevver got koed (well some do). but its **** like this that gets me thinking you guys are way to biased to judge his career objectively. you say the rematcxhes were **** well what about the rematch dejesus gave duran when he florred and beat duran the first time was those rematches witrh dejesus **** too.:deal I don't mind you guys liking roberto but give the fighters that beat him their due respect because they did beat him regardless of whatever excuse you can come upo with he got beat by fighters many would not consider great, and by many fighters many would consider great. grat hjof fighter but top 20 I wouldnt go that far not enough done outside of 135 and with weak comp at 135 he would hof had to beat ray twice and at least beat benitez to warrant top 20.
i see what you're saying and no one discounts the dejesus win. Esteban won the first fight fair and square and would have been a great champion in most non duran eras. The losses to hearns, hagler, benetiz and lang all happened and whether a result of poor training, planning, or just plain getting owned don't change the fact they happened. Duran has a lot of losses for such a high caliber athelete. BUT the second and third leonard loses were not the same as their first fight because in that, they were both at their primes. not the same for the sequels. again, i disagree with your placement of duran but you have sound reasoning; his loses should and even for most duran fans, DO count against him
good post at least you haven't threatened to kill my whole family like some roberto duran posters.. your a good poster look forward to seeing more of your posts
This forum is full of jackasses caught up in the 'Duran is God' bull**** hype. He won a LOT of his fights using illegal, rough house tactics which should have got him DQ's on his padded record, instead of 'WKO.' Whether he was beating Buchanan at the time of his win is absolutely irrelevant. Golota was giving Bowe a beatdown twice, but transgressed the RULES OF BOXING and was quite rightly thrown out. The same fate should have befallen Duran, end of. As has been pointed out on other posts, Duran's record against Leonard, Hagler and Hearns was poor. He beat Leonard once, fair and square, but came up short on 4 other occasions against this trio of true greats. And against Hearns, he was made to look a complete bum. The 'Hit Man,' by the way, has greater claims to boxing immortality, in so far as he moved up through the weights, fighting and WINNING against a greater calibre of fighter than Mr 'No Mas' did in the second half of his career. Even though Hearns lost to Barkley - a common foe of the pair - on two occasions, one could argue that 'The Blade' got very lucky - twice - in fights that most observers thought he was losing and, particularly in their first pairing, was on the point of being TKO'd himself. This should not detract from the fact that Tommy Hearns won versions of 'World Championship' straps at Welter, Light Middle, Middle, Super Middle, Light Heavy AND Cruiserweight. Moreover, he comprehensively defeated Leonard in their rematch (irrespective of what the record books may tell you) as well as men who were naturally some 3 stone heavier than him when he was at his 'prime.' I stand by my original assessment. Duran was a rough, tough hombre, who invariably came up short against the true greats (and, to be fair, some fairly ordinary fighters too) of his era.