Incidentally Benitez and Laing both fought mostly quite flat footed fights against Duran and beat him to the punch.I'd question anyone saying they won with mobile boxing having actually seen the bouts.
I tend to agree. I had a convo with someone who said in not so many words that because Kalambay beat McCallum that its concievable that Benitez could beat him the same way, now whether you think that to be that case or not is irrelevant, what i tried to explain is that Benitez did not use the ring like Kalambay, Benitez is a guy that uses tight little turns and fights more from mid range where as Kalambay is a guy that actually uses his legs and gets around the ring.
Hmmmm... Benitez used slick upper body / head movement to frustrate Duran and W.B. owned better speed at 154 to outbox Duran on the cards, while Laing did run early on before listening to Mick Duff's instructions to begin settling down and start to punch Duran back...... I have both bouts on file......... MR.BILL:deal
Only the Duran of June 16th, 1983 would have had a good chance against Curry at this weight. Duran could be brilliant (Moore, Cuevas) or lackluster (Benitez, Hearns) at 154lbs. Curry was a brilliant fighter with both great relexes and great power. In most instances I like Curry in this one.
Roberto would stop Curry in round 8 or 9 I would think. Duran had trouble with speed guys like Hearns and Benitez at 154. Donald was fast, but the way he kept his feet wide apart meant he would be too much of a sitting target for Roberto.
Duran's lackluster and brilliant fights are explained by his fans as his choice since they say he didn't train for the second Leonard/Benitez/Hearns fights. 3 great fighters he didn't train. Yet he trained for Moore. They say he didn't train when he was lackluster and brilliant when he wanted to be. Duran did not train for two ATG fighters who held world championship belts Benitez and Hearns. but he trained for a washed up Cueves and a very inexperienced Moore which is totally ridiculous to even think. The lackluster part had to do with the quality of his opposition. Look at Duran's resume. He beat Moore and Barkley for his 154 and 160 titles, not Hearns/Benitez/Hagler whom he fought and lost to (easily) for titles at the same weights.
I never excuse Duran against Benitez (who did train even less than Duran) or Hearns (he would always have lost that one). But I excuse him for the Leonard rematch since Leonard himself admitted his tactics.
Having a pretty objective view of Manos de Piedra myself, the hot & cold theory sticks IMO. As for whether it was training and not some other external (or internal factor) powering the rollercoaster, don't really care to speculate - as it would be just that, speculation. He was certainly a box of chocolates at the higher weights, though.
Duran's durability would be the key here.At 154, Curry was a lesser version of himself at 147, and even there he was floored.Duran by eighth or ninth round stoppage.
Gotta agree with this, although my view is a bit more nuanced. Curry was no pushover, and combined with his natural size advantage, i think he would beat Duran.
from the little i saw of curry (mccallum , honeyghan , maybe another one) he is more willing to fight than leonard and thus won't need to be forced to fight. he willingly fights. i think he will not choose leonard's best style against duran simply for being himslef. and if leonard fought with duran curry certainly will. so maybe i voted wrong when i voted curry on points. but i think that a prime curry fighting at 154 against duran whom is also above his optimal weight does stand a chance.
what floored ? honeyghan was a ramming ram. worse than hopkins and holyfield combined in this aspect.
I could see Donald starting out good, but Roberto is going to do in that Curry chin eventually and stop him around seven rounds.