I imagine this matchup has already been discussed, but I want to put a twist on it. Is the outcome of this match affected by whether it's contested at 135 lbs or 147 lbs? Was Duran the better lightweight and Armstrong the better welterweight or vice-versa? Or was one better than the other at both weights? And why? I have Armstrong second on my all-time list, with Duran third. But this is because Armstrong ripped through three divisions with only one controversial loss at lightweight and a draw at middleweight (he won both fights according to most accounts). But I have this feeling that Duran would beat him at 135 and 147 lbs, both closely contested. Why? In part I say this because Duran was the better boxer and, if on his game, could match Armstrong's intensity. But the deeper reason is because Duran was bigger. I can see Armstrong beating Leonard, but I have trouble seeing Armstrong giving Hagler fits or beating Barkley. What do you think? Am I off base?
Roberto looked as good as I had ever seen him against Palomino and Leonard the first time..So he fit into welter fine. Henry very rarely ever made it anywhere near the welter limit even as welter champ..He often had to drink water and beer just to put on weight close to the fight. So I would say Duran is the better welter and I see him beating Henry there...I also see Leonard beating Armstrong quite clearly to tell you the truth. A fight between them at lightweight would have been awesome, one of the ultimate matchups at the weight...And there have been equally valid arguements for either taking it. I tend to lean toward Roberto aswell because like you I see him as the overall more skilled boxer and I also see him being almost as if not as strong at the weight physically. I have heard a lot of people argue that Hank would have been at his best at 126-130..that makes his achievements even more impressive IMO.
Duran beats Armstrong at any weight, excluding FW, which would still be a close fight, look at Duran stopping Marcel just outside the FW limit. Duran is leagues better defensively, superior puncher, better counter puncher, technically better and every bit as ferocous and intense At 135 it goes the full 15 at 147 Duran stops Armstrong because hes stronger at the weight
You overrate Duran. Duran is not "leagues better" defensively, technically, in terms of punching or counterpunching. He would not pose a challenge for Armstrong as a FW because at that time he was a teenager who fought 14 novices while Armstrong was about 25 with over 90 fights. ...And Duran is unlikely going to stop Armstrong at 147.
Duran's just a master or slipping and countering and timing his opponent, Armstrong can't do the sort of things Duran does so well. I can't see a smaller pressure fighter beating him ever accept yes as a teenager, he'd just have so many openings to counter with his best shots, he'd be the better boxer and the better puncher Armstrong actually only fought 13 fights at or below the FW limit, although he could have made it more if he drained, I'm sure the Duran of the Marcel fight, 2lbs above FW limit, would be a stiff challenge to FW Armstrong or any FW despite his young age, although FW Armstrong I would favour over him Duran's just such a magnificent offense force he may be the 1 to stop Armstrong in a war
Armstrong was a smaller man, but it is very arguable that he was the stronger man here. Henry was inordinately strong. Armstrong's technique was sound, and his defense is good -despite the style. He wasn't simply a "pressure fighter" -he had skill, he was elusive, although not to Duran's level. Armstrong's not quite making 126 is irrelevant. He was a FW and fought in many over the weight bouts -this was common back then. Just because he came in at 130 doesn't necessarily mean that he "grew out of the division." Typically, champs fought so often that the only made title defenses and when the time came. They weren't idle in the meantime. They were active, though not so weight conscious for bouts that they took to remain active and get paid. I doubt that Duran would be the boss in this fight. He would be forced to rely on Plan B. The reason why I'd pick Duran is because he had more options than Henry, but it isn't because he was stronger and hit harder because it ain't necessarily so. You can't underestimate any man who had 101 KOs on his record. That's an elite group with only about 10 members from the modern era including Saddler, Moore, Robinson, and Armstrong...
In a nutshell, at 135lbs, Ted Spoon would feel safer putting money on Hammerin’ Hank. Armstrong makes sure this fight is fought to the bone, and nobody was better than him at doing this. Dictating would be a big problem, and Duran needs that more than Armstrong whose method of pin n’ pound is both effective and simple.
Duran wouldn't have been bullying Armstrong or out-muscling him as he was able to most opponents, but his skill level and versatility was a step ahead, even on the inside. I feel he'd get the better of the in-fighting exchanges for the most part, aside from the rounds he generally took off or coasted in, in which case Armstrong's relentless pressure would bag him those ones. It's also very possible he'd look to box and counter as he did in the third Dejesus fight in those resting rounds. Either way, I'd take Duran to control most of the action, whether with his back to the ropes or in the center of the ring, though I do believe Armstrong's non-stop pressure would bag him a few rounds, as even Duran couldn't keep up a pace like that for the full 15 against that kind of firepower. Duran UD 9-6, maybe 10-5.
Duran had an inherant advantage at higher weights because of the era he fought in and the training methods. Armstrong could only make welterweight or middleweight by drinking gallons of water before the weigh in then pissing for an hour before the fight. So you are probably not off base.
Armstrong is a lot smaller than people think. When he challenged Ross for the welterweight title he had to come within 7 pounds of the welterweight limit according to the rules contract. I weighed 124 pounds I drank beer every day to gain weight, ate steak, potatoes, I ate candies. I drank so much water the day of the weigh-in every time I walked you could here glug, glug, glug. I weighed in at 139 ½. The fight was postponed for 10 days due to weather (the fight was outside) and I didnt have to weigh in again. This puts Armstrongs greatnes into perspective.
It certainly does, but it also puts into perspective the kind of disadvantage he'd be at in head to head comparisons with the bigger, more modern LW's and especially WW's. I still couldn't strongly favor many fighters over him at LW and under.
I have heard people make this general point before. Two questions. Specifically, what was different about the way Duran and Armstrong trained. Given that Ray Arcel schooled him, I would think Duran would be steeped in the classic method. Looking at film of him training it doesn't look like a different habit than that of Armstrong. Second, generally, do you think that modern techniques are really better? It seems the more modern training becomes, the less impressive the results. It used to be that fighters could fight hard for 15 rounds. Now they get gassed in half that many. At heavyweight they have great physiques, but not to great technique.
