Leoanrd disputably beat Hagler. He never gave rematches unless he thought he had an advantage. He ran away from Duran in their third bout in an oversized ring. He clearly lost to Hearns in the rematch. He lost to Terry Norris and was beaten by Hector Camacho. He was very good for a short time. Duran was great for a much longer time.
It's hard to take away from Duran's effort against Hagler. Hagler by all rights should have knocked him out earlier than Hearns...not for reach or whatever advantage, but because Hagler was a significantly more savage fighter than Tommy. Duran showed his great lion's heart and will in that fight and almost won it. It still counts for better than such a high percentage of past champions imo. Even when SRL got the (disputable) win against Marvelous, Marvin was THE MAN at the time.
You are saying Durán wasn't quick enough to use his style effectively against Hearns. It certainly showed in that fight. I get that: speed is relative and someone like Hearns can make even relatively quick fighters look slow. Here is where we disagree: how much quicker was Durán in Montreal? Was he quick enough to get through Hearns' long reach without getting nailed? I believe he was. It's not an impossible task. Mike Tyson always faced opponents that had huge reach and height advantages over him and he found a way to get inside.
How do you think a proportionately smaller Mike Tyson would do against Hearns. Tyson was about 5'10 or 11 and about 220. Much more compact than Durán. If you scaled him down to 154 you would have someone much shorter than Durán with a much shorter reach than Durán.
Styles make fights but Hearns was a much harder puncher than Hagler. As Leonard and Roldan said. And they knew. You cannot play around with Hearns power and speed. Hearns fought him on the outside. or as Hearns said he fought him with the arms.
Duran would be on the outside against Hearns who would be counterpunching and when he hurt Duran he would start to drop in more punches. I would never be a good style for Duran.
You are correct sir! And may I say, thank you for keeping the Leonard-Duran rivalry alive. I may not agree with you about Roberto, but it is enjoyable to have someone to argue and relive the fights with. On other fighters we see eye to eye, but this would be one boring exercise if we all agreed on everything. A fine, erudite nemesis you have been. I enjoy the repartee! Happy Fathers Day bud. P.S. Saad Muhammad was born today also. Happy bday Saad and rest in peace. You've earned it.
I appreciate what you say. It is never personal. Sometimes I think people think it is. If people here get tired of me posting here, I would leave. I am not that stubborn. I figure it is just another viewpoint. I remember his age because I always say he was 32 and a day later 33.. So it always stuck in my mind. My friend from New York came to see me once and said. Roberto is such and such age. I said no he was born June 16, 1951.. And he said, if that is right I will never talk to you again. And he said after seeing the date, ok I won't talk to you again. The Hearns fight makes me remember that, and the Moore fight I think was on his 32nd birthday. I enjoy talking to you guys also. You guys know your boxing and you believe in what you say. Nothing better than that. Take care.
80's is my era and I know it pretty well... And Yes Morlocks, I agree, Pernell is a solid poster and to deny his vast knowledge of the 80's fighters is just blatantly wrong. And I will say, I have learned things from him, you as well. I remember a post when he described Hagler as a man/his life and you gave him props on it. It was solid. I don't agree with all his views on Duran either, but at the end of the day, we all have our opinions and come here to enjoy boxing. And that's what really matters...