Chavez or Duran?

100% Agree with that.

 

Chavez was my favourite fighter of the 90s; Roberto second only to Tommy in the 80s.

They were so close in ability, but Duran was that bit better at everything.

That little difference makes Duran my third finest fighter ever, and although I believe Chavez is the finest Mexican fighter ever, he still does not crack my top 10.

As for head to head, I could see Duran sweeping the board from 130 to 147.

Although a relative novice at 130 Duran did beat Marcel, so this would be far from easy for Chavez. Chavez WS15

At 135 Chavez peaked, Duran arguably was still improving when he left the division.

I see a Hagler/Monroe (or even DeJesus) type scenario here. Chavez upsets Duran fight one. Fight two, Duran struggling to come to terms with Chavez, but eventually figuring him out to win the tough decision. Fight three, Duran bring his A game and get on top of Chavez by the middle rounds, and may even stop him late, but if not, Duran by comfortable decision.

Duran of the late 70s was at his peak. The Palomino performance was arguably his best, and at Welterweight Chavez got old quick, So Duran is stopping Chavez at 147.

140 is a bit more intersting, Chavez although a little past it, was a force in the division for four years, Duran bypassed the division to challenge Leonard.

My hunch is Duran would win, as he would of arguably peaked at 140, and as mentioned I would say Chavez was slightly past it. Duran WU15.

 

Duran is a whole different level resume wise and in ability. I don't see how that's not clear.

Far more dominant LW against better competition.
Has a #2 WW on his strap after age 30.
Great performances far past prime against Barkley, Camacho, Hagler, not including weight disadvantages.

Chavez's best wins, longevity, and performance against bigger guys are not of the same quality.

 

Well, i'm not the best at this resume/career comparison **** but i'll give it a go.

Their records, for reference
http://cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/duran.htm
http://cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/chavrec.htm

Duran dominated one of the thickest LW divisions ever in his prime. Even before he hit 20 fights he had a W over a former champ in Marcel, who was no joke.. This same man beat Arguello four years AFTER Duran and him fought. From then on he racked up more LW straps, Buchanan, Kobayashi, DeJesus, Mamby, Viruet etc etc.. And then took on SRL in his prime at age 30 and won, having had nearly 80 fights at that point against great competition. Then he moved up and continued to fight more champs with inconsistent results. He destroyed Barkley and Moore far past prime, but was dominated by Hearns, Benitez and Leonard in rematches, and lost a close one to Hagler... But the point was that when he was in form past his prime he was capable of making good guys with years and natural weight on him look like amateurs. Look at what he did to camacho the first time around.


Chavez had a good career but he is just an inconsistent performer in his own way. He has a lot of good straps, but against the BEST in his career he came up short more than Duran did, and the best he faced wasn't as good as Duran's. Look at what happened with Whitaker. Look at how Taylor was arguably robbed the first time around. He just didn't face Duran's level of competition and the only way to really understand that is to watch their careers.

I could talk about differences in their ability/skillsets a little better, I think. Also I don't think Chavez deserves to be anywhere near the top 25.

 

Good assessment.

 

Duran at any weight

 

Look closer at Duran's LW competition and accomplishments in defenses(12, 11 by knockout). It is full of future and former champions. Plus, losing one fight to DeJesus because of a single down in a close fight is no big shame. If you consider one loss ruining a 72-1 peak being nearly unbeatable for 13 years to be equivalent to Chavez's peak, I strongly disagree. Taylor was a good fighter, but Chavez beat him by two seconds and a referee any way you slice it, and he was dominated by Whitaker totally.

Names and lists are just lists, without any context they are useless. Like I'm saying, longevity and range of weight also make a big difference. The man fought in title matches for three decades.

 

Chavez was only a special talent as a fighter operating at/slightly under the lightweight limit imo.

Which is unfortunate for him as lot of his work and more famous fights were done as a more workmanlike 140lber where he was still really good, but a lot more vulnerable to a loss by another really good-to say nothing of genuinely great-fighter.I'm not sure if Julio at 140 was really even that much better than the best 154lb\early 160 Duran, though he was certainly more consistent and effective overall.

 

I agree

 

I think Duran's got a pretty comfortable edge any way you want to look at it. I tend to rate him inside the top 10 of all time, whereas Chavez probably isn't making the cut for top 30.

 

Duran should be heavily favored at lightweight, where he was king of the jungle. He would also beat up JCC at any weight higher than that. Only forcing Duran to fight at 130 would give JCC a chance.

 

Can't see how Duran would be 11-20 in ATG at light weight. He is almost universally thought of as within the top 3 all time. I have him no. 1. JCC was maybe top 10 at Jr. Lightweight. But only maybe. I have Saddler and Arguello at the top at jr. lightweight.