Benitez certainly aged quickly. He was shot at 25. He was an artist up against the ropes. If he were fighting today I don't think he would have any trouble.
Many things come into play, a couple are the timing of the fight and styles. Duran, even at his very best, would always have a difficult time with Benitez. The timing of the fight was bad for Duran, and great for Benitez. Logic does not always apply to boxing. Duran beats Barkley, Barkley beats Hearns (X2), Hearns beats Benitez , Hearns beats Duran. That being said, I am 63 years old, been a die hard boxing fan for over 50 years, and Duran is the best overall fighter I ever saw, wins, losses, warts and all.
Good points. Oddly had they fought a year or two later Duran probably wins. Duran was much older but Benitez had no legs.
1-Because Benitez wasn't a bum. He was highly skilled fighter but wasn't on Leonard's or Hearns' level. 2-Duran wasn't that great at 154 and above 154. He was monster at 135-147. 3-Duran was just 30 year old in that night and barely past his prime as age. Benitez simply outclassed him. No need making excuses.
I dont suggest that.. it was more about his infighting skills.. his foot movement was good but not a Leonard or camacho
No. I saw Duranand admire his skills and mostly innate boxing skills, but I also favor certain styles as we all do. Boxing is what I love among other things. On these boards if someone has opposing views it is not very accepted. I would think that is the nice thing about opinions.
Of the fighters you mentioned, Benitez had the shortest reach: Benitez 70" Leonard 74" Hagler 75" Hearns 78" Perhaps that is why Benitez didn't even try to keep his distance.