Roberto Duran .Vs. Thomas Hearns 1980

I agree wholeheartedly and think there is a certain herd mentality on this thread

If its Hearns facing duran instead of ray in 1980..........than its also durans biggest payday ...and its a very hungry,motivated duran with an aura of invincibility still surrounding him.a slick defensive fighter by that point under ray arcel.

People forget how even after no mas and the subsequent years in the wilderness folowed by a,resurrection, how SHOCKING it was still was in 1984 to see hearns bomb out Duran.

Hearns is not going to do this in 1980.I think a rabid,foaming at the mouth duran stops hearns in the 12th

 

If it's 1980, it's likely Duran quits before he gets knocked out.

 

Duran is overrated. I'm tired of hearing about people trying to somehow say he was better than leonard, hearns, and hagler. He lost to all of them and almost got knocked out by hagler at the end of their fight. Get over it.

 

Or poos his pants. Allegedly.

 

But, when he fought Leonard the first time, he was at the top of his game.

I can envision that version of Duran doing what Leonard was able to against Hearns - survive the early rounds, then catch up to Hearns in the later rounds as Hearns fragility comes into play.

 

I don't agree with most of the sentiments here. Tommy was a little too green in 1980 to beat Duran of the Montreal fight. That Duran beats Tommy with his guile, guts and ring generalship. Tommy wasn't ready for that duran. So for me, it's a very close call. Slight edge to Duran based on timeline

 

Hearns beats Duran whenever they fight.

 

I would want Duran to win...
But I think Hearns would win, and probably by stoppage.
Thinking of differences at that weight:
Duran was faster than he was 4 years later at 154, and that might have helped him turn his head/roll with punches, which he tended to do to reduce their impact. However Tommy would also have been faster at 147, and I think the combined with the fact that Roberto would have to get inside, unlike SRL who had more options against Hearns, would pretty much spell the end for him.
Someone earlier mentioned Foreman/Frazier as an ****ogy, I think that even though the styles are diferent, it is an apt description. Just the way they match up, size and style wise, Roberto cannot win.
Funny, he could beat Barkley, and give Hagler pause, both of whom clubbed Hearns. Styles make fights, clearly.

 

They do indeed, but so do time lines. A prime Duran, against a green Hearns, is a different scenario than what we witnessed. Let's think about this for a second, Duran can't take Hearns best punches, but he can take Barkley's best punches, which are good enough to drop Hearns. Correct?

But still there's no way for Duran to win at 147 where presumably Hearns has less power and is in the learning stages of his career.

I'm not saying he would win, but if he were to get on the inside and do what he does best, I can envision him winning. How likely that would be is hard to say. It seemed to me the Duran of Montreal would probably succeed, at least in the early rounds.

 

This is a good post. And I ponder the same questions.

 

Duran from 1980 brings a lot more to the table than the `84 version. Hears on the other hand probably peaked later at `54. I don`t believe Hearns was quite as strong as a Welterweight especially his legs.
Duran brings more speed as a Welterweight and more intensity. With Tommy`s chin not being that tough it`s not that hard to envision The Hands of Stone putting Hearns down when he lands something solid.

With that said it`s more of a 50/50 fight IMO. Can`t count out someone with Hearns ability but Duran was fighting at a superior level in his prime.

 

Good insight.

 

Or gets knocked out 3 times in his prime....oh sorry that was Hearns.

 

He'd be wearing his white shorts, too. None of that navy blue fabric to hide behind.

What is this based on?

 

Hearns wins late, unless Duran can manage to get past that jab.