Duran did everything better than Chavez?.....Agree or Disagree?

Duran was superior defensively, which is something I think a lot of people ignore about him. He had the edge in killer instinct/ring intensity as well.

 

Whats bra?

I've never been into fights really, i've always believed in only handing out 2LB LUMP HAMMERING'S........no rematches ever, fast pursuasive & effective so go onto my website & buy a poster you bubbling bucket of puss & i'll ensure the package you recieve is hand delivered:smoke

 

I disagreed, i have to be objective even though the nature of the question is subjective (which sounds crazy but that's how i feel).

Like Itrymariti said, Chavez cut the ring better, even though Duran had his own methods of doing so which were effective to the highest degree, i can't conclusively say Duran was better at this. Chavez also seems to be better when turning back foot boxer, all things considered, meaning both didn't do so very often but Chavez overall probably tops him on the observation of the occurrences that are relevant.

So i voted disagree. For the record i think Duran was better.

 

I agree with you, i'd better go log onto confused.com as it's a toughie to pick one without detracting from the other.

 

Both are "A" grade lightweights of our past......... BUT! Duran is A+ while Chavez is A- in grades....... Close call, but Duran reigns supreme....

MR.BILLhat

 

I think almost all would agree with that, but that's not the question Bill

 

Agreeing with a scouser, you must feel horrible haha

 

Well then, based on my assessment, yes, Duran was better overall........:deal

MR.BILL

 

I think that Duran was the superior fighter, but he doesn't exactly overwhelm Chavez attribute to attribute. The most decisive factor is defense very much in Duran's favor. I also think Duran was slightly faster, stronger, and more powerful.

I'll call their chins roughly even. Chavez didn't face punchers as large as Duran did, but he didn't have Duran's defense either. I can't really say who took a punch on the jaw better.

I think Chavez had a better offense. Chavez has as good an offense as any fighter I've ever watched. Chavez systematically destructed opponents like no other.

I think Chavez had better footwork. Chavez kept the fight in his preferred range as well as anyone I've seen.

 

One thing I think is a huge factor in Duran's favor is a large edge in footspeed. Take that away from Duran and I have a feeling he had the abillity to be a little more precise with his punches and a better combination puncher (which are 2 areas I'd give Chavez an edge). I think Chavez is a little underrated defensively but you'd have to give Duran the edge. To answer the question, no Duran wasn't better at EVERYTHING, but was a better Lightweight. Not by a large margin in my opinion. Best Ever Lightweight vs. High ATG

 

Note:

Chavez was great, but only kicked hard ass between 130 to 140 pounds.... Chavez was never jack**** above 140.........

Duran did win the WBC title from SRL at 147 and the WBA and WBC 154 / 160 pound crowns from "Moore and Barkley" in impressive fashion......

Chavez was much more seasoned than Davey Moore ever was in 1983, but no way in hell Chavez was strong enough or powerful enough to fight at 154 pounds and beat a youthful Moore....... Not gonna happen........

Barkley would pound Chavez right into the ground at 160 pounds.......

Duran reigns far superior to Chavez.........:hat