Supposing Roberto Duran had been born 10 yrs later..

well that means he is a contender in 1982 and gets to fight Mancini whom he would beat, or he could take on Arguello in 1981 and I think lose to him.. But later in the decade either way Duran loses to Pernell Whitaker by decision. The lightweights of the 1980's were not great either. Chavez and Whitaker were the top guys. Bramble would be easy for Duran to beat in retrospect, but Rosario could be a problem with his power, but Duran would get to him and stop him. Whitaker is the elite guy who would beat Duran. Duran would have never taken on Hagler and Hearns had he came about 10 years later. he would be a lightweight when they are still prime at middleweight. He would not fight Leonard. He would have had guys like Nunn to fight or again Whitaker at 147. Duran would have trouble avoiding Whitaker. That would have been the Leonard of 10 years later, only Pernell would not lose the first fight. Either way the problem Duran had with Hearns,Benitez and Leonard would come up 10 years later, but the path would be a little easier since the guys were not as great. It might have been better for him 10 years later to be honest. He might actually do better. Having no Hearns or Benitez or Leonard or Hagler would help Duran

 

I dont think Duran ever loses to Arguello.

 

Imagine Chavez vs. Duran... Holy crap!

 

Great fight but once again Duran gets the win.

 

yeah Robert, I agree. Still though, would be amazing to watch. Like a more highly skilled version of Corrales and Castillo.

 

I know I'll be in the minority here but I would favor Duran over Whitaker at lightweight.

 

nutrition and dieting was improved in the 80's. Maybe he could have campaigned at HW, met a young, inexperienced Tyson and stopped his career from ever taking off. Who knows? He certainly had the fundamental skill and heart that Tyson lacked. Also an eager young Tyson would be coming right at him, and nobody outfights an in-shape Duran in the trenches.

Would he have conquered Holmes though? That fight wouldve surely come first. Styles make fights and Holmes jab and superior size i think would be tough to overcome. But hey, who wouldve thought a blown up LW, past his prime would've ass ****ed MW beast Iran Barkley LOLOL

 

is that a joke Duranium?

 

im guessing you're a Tyson fan:roll:

General Forum is one up:deal

 

You're not in the minority. Only on these boards with these kids who never saw Duran in his prime either live on T.V. or in person. Noone I know who did thinks Whitaker beats Duran. These youtubers see the stop action and editingf fights and think they know, but they ddon't. There should be a classic site on the web for those who were at the fights in the 70's-90's and earlier and offer firsthand experinece instead of the crap you read on this forum nowadays. Anyone who thinks from 81-on in his career is even near his prime is an ignoramous of his career. Just like the guy who keeps bringing up Leo.2. Leo. himmself admitted he gave Duran enough time to get out of shape and no time to get back before fighting him. Just look at Duran's body in the two fights. Paliomino said it best when he said when Duran took off his robe he could tell he was in no shape for the fight.

 

im definately not a Tyson fan. But it's obvious your a Presidente Duran supporter. And that's fine, but damn, in keeping realistic thought in mind, how does Duran get KO'ed by Hearns at 154 lbs and not get murdered by Tyson at 200 lbs? Tyson was that size when he was 12! There's only so much natural size a human can give up.

 

I'm participating in an exercise in futility aren't I.

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl