Could Roberto Duran go fifteen rounds with Carlos Monzon?

Monzon on points, too big and Duran too clever to be stopped.

 

I think Monzon would stop him late in the fight, some where between 12-15 right as Duran was starting to get tired because lets face it Monzon is not getting tired.

 

Duran had a good chin. But i am not sure he could take 15 rounds of Carlos Monzon. I would say probably not. Monzon would not stop him like Hearns did, but probably an 8th or 9th round stoppage. I always thought Hagler would beat Monzon by the way.

 

I agree with most of the posters here. If Monzon turns it on Duran probably doesn't see the final bell. Monzon has all the attributes to give Duran problems. Height, reach, superior strength and size. Duran, as always, would be game and would make it a good tactical fight for about 7-10 rounds. After that Monzon starts to systematically break Duran down. Ironically, I see Duran faring better against Monzon than Monzon would have fared against a great lightheavyweight of that time like Bob Foster. I think Foster manhandles Monzon and knocks him out in 5-7 rounds. Here I'll pick Monzon TKO 13 Duran.

 

No way. Barkley was a glorified club fighter, Davey Moore was led ot slughter, only 8 pro fights, and he went in sick. Hagler dogged it against Duran. I know some fans of his will be pissed, but both him and Duran fought with no desire, both wanted to avoid getting ko'd by other.

Monzon had mean streak, he would take Duran out, not as quick and explosive as Hearns, but slower and more brutally. Monzon also had quickest right hand I ever saw, maybe he would take Duran out like Hearnds did, but his being a bit methodical leads me to believe it would be different.

 

Duran got into really, really good shape for Marvin. I don't think that Duran was any less a fighter than say the Emile Griffith who went the distance with Monzon.

If Duran goes into the Monzon fight with the same mentality that he did against Hagler, looking to make it respectable without ever really threatening to go for the win, then he'll last the distance, no problem.

Duran can fight "small" effective enough not to lose his legs late in the fight imo.

 

Duran went 15 with Hagler because Hagler fought a tentative fight. I was at that fight. Boring fight!!! Then I went to Hearns/Duran 7 months later and I saw Hearns fight Duran the way you have to fight him. Hearns went for it and outclassed Duran. Obliterated him with speed and sharpness!!!!!!! I don't think Monzon was Hearns caliber but he could stop Duran. Hagler would have stopped Duran had he fought more aggressive. Remember Benitez making Duran look like a fool?????

 

Hearns is the only fighter who fought Duran the right way. He was going to fight his fight and not let Duran dictate the inside fighting or pace. Takes a great fighter to knock out another great fighter like that. Barkley would have never knocked out Duran like that. The only reason this argument is here because Hagler fought a stupid slow boring fight with Duran and Barkley was not that great! That is no reason to think Duran could beat Monzon. Look what Hearns did to Duran. Look what Benitez did to Duran!!! What Leonard did to Duran!!!

 

Yes, because Halger could've done what Hearns did if he wanted to?!? Come off it, he showed Duran a lot of respect and Duran's tactics were spot on, not enough to win, but then an ex-lightweight champ' really has no basis being competitive with an ATG 160lber.

 

Hagler won the fight. He didn't see Duran as a big threat to take his title or knock him out. With Hearns he knew he had a challenge there and he came in breathing fire. The Hagler which came out for Hearns was not the same one who fought Duran. Hagler for Hearns was top motivated and was going to win no matter what and by knockout. Duran being competitive? I was there. It was a good sparring match. The only question was Hagler could not change gears when he found out Duran was going to sit back and counterpunch with his right. Hagler won the decision. Duran was still a decent fighter in 1983 and still a champion at 154 I agree. Which makes what Hearns did at a lower weight and 7 months later that much more impressive.

 

My point is that Hagler could not have done what Tommy did. So comparing the two performances is unfair regardless of how the Duran-Hagler fight played out IMO.

 

Monzon was a tall middle with a disecting and hurtful jab, he would get to the mighty Duran in latter rounds and I believe ko him.

 

I think he'd break down and manhandle Duran quite easily tbh, his accurate head and body shots would take apart Duran who got pretty tired in the championship rounds at Middle whereas Monzon didnt. For Duran to survive he'd have to focus more on defense and survivng but he probably wouldnt, Monzon takes him late TKO.

 

I agree Hagler could have stopped Duran if he went all out. Hagler took the path of least resistance - but not without good reason though.

Had he tried to take Duran out, he would have had a price to pay for a few rounds because Duran could see Marvin's punches coming a lot easier than he could Hearns', and he would have survived long enough to throw some hurt back at Marvin. Hagler didn't want to risk taking those shots when he could comfortably outbox Duran.

With Hearns, Hagler didn't have the luxury of relying on his boxing skills to get the job done. Had he held back and boxed with Hearns, there was a big chance he could drop a decision - he knew he had to get the KO to win - this wasn't the path of least resistance, it was the ONLY path Hagler could take to win the fight.

In any case, I think it's entirely possible Monzon won't do much more than Hagler in the way of trying to win the fight if he sees that he is outpointing Duran comfortably.

Again, I mention the second Emile Griffith fight as evidence of Monzon going through the motions with a fighter no better (imo) than the Duran that faced Hagler.

As for the Duran-Benitez fight, that's irrelevant in so many ways that it's not even worth discussing.