ESPN: "I think Pacquiao is better than Duran"

Well yeah I think I can agree more on this, that he might be on terms early on in the fight, I highly doubt this fight would be close on the cards ultimately though personally. At the start of that clip when Clottey is jumping at Corrales and unleashing leather, I just reckon Duran would be slipping and landing multiple bombs there. And when Clottey is doing his high guard thing and standing there I think he'd be ripped apart. I just think he'd be outclassed to be honest. The fast left hooks from Clottey would make it interesting though, they'd land. I'm not one of these posters that likes to make out like Duran is invincible, or any fighter for that matter. I think you know that PP, but like I said, I just think Clottey is outclassed. And I think that's an objective opinion.

 

Going by that Corrales fight you could envision a Davey Moore style scenario late on especially with the Duran right hand being timed over the top of Clottey's left & the high guard would would be breached by Duran's left hooks to the body then the stright right hand down the pipe. Even so Clotteys always been a bit of an enigma to me:huh I'am giving him his props as he's a tough ****er & properbly would be there at the end of 12 but not 15:bart

 

You're not alone...

 

I won't argue Clottey never really proved it against the best, personally I think it'd be a tad closer but I am a bit of a fan of his. I did have a feeling he'd have been all wrong for Mosley though (clottey). I thought he'd run Pacquaio close but he just didn't do anything, but when he punched he landed pretty easily

 

Clottey is a good combination puncher and has a sneaky club of a right hand. He's good on the inside. The thing he lacks the most is the interest. He can't stay interested throughout the fight. The same thing happens to a lot of Cubans when they get out of a **** hole and to some boxers who are forced to box from a young age. They use the skills they've learn to get by and has flashes of greatness but don't have the drive to be the best.

 

let me put it this way. If Duran had the same competition at welterweight he did at lightweight, he would have been almost as effective I think. Don't tell me there were Leonard and Hearns and Benitez quality fighters when he fought at lightweight. You really think so? Honestly?

 

He lost to Kirkland Laing.

 

at 154. Yet then people give him credit for beating Davey Moore the next year and also Barkley in 1989. But at welterweight he was still good. Being beaten by a great in Leonard and quitting couldn't have done good for his confidence. But he regrouped.

 

if pac beats mayweather then he is better (because then he would have done what duran failed to do aganst his eras mayweather, ie, leonard)

 

as for arguing that Duran went up a little higher in weight then pac...well duran also started at a higher weight.

id still put duran above pac at this point..but again..if pac beats mayweather..i would change that view

 

1. Duran beat Leonard.
2. This era's Leonard = Oscar de la hoya, not Floyd Mayweather.

 

yea he beat him once when leonard fought like a idiot.....but the second fight cancelled that out....i dont know..i think quitting like that just has to hurt a mans legacy.


yeah in the sense of a media darling..i just mean leonard and Mayweather as slick boxers...of course they had very different styles.

 

And yet Marquez won more actual rounds against Pac.
( by you a non ATG). Over a couple of fights.

 

ahhh yea..but duran wasnt as fast or explosive with his punches..espically as he moved up in weight.

 

Who do you think had the bigger **** MAG.