Hearns -Duran

You lost RESPECT for him? Well let me say that I have none for you. Every fighter who ever lived gained my respect the moment they got in the ring.

Terrible post and terrible attitude

 

Indeed. This is perhaps the worst one as well. Even worse than the '86 Tyson Vs SSJ Montreal Duran H2H's he gets favoured in.

He was clearly **** scared of Hearns. Never, ever, did he touch gloves so many times in his career as he did in those few rounds. He literally got lifted off his feet by body shots, beaten to a pulp, completely dominated and knocked clean out....

....yet if he'd have had a poo before the fight, these people think he would've stopped Hearns.atschatschatsch

 

It is indeed farcical. Also what annoys the **** out of me is '88 Tyson' being the best heavyweight ever, but '90 Tyson' was some imposter who Buster Douglas was lucky to get in the ring with.

 

Dude,

I lived through all that **** during Duran's rise and fall of 1980 and up until he dropped a decision to Camacho in Denver in 2001...
:yep

Duran of 1983 was once again motivated and propely tuned for "Cuevas, Moore and Hagler." The Duran who was waxed by Hearns in June '84 was ***** whipped and drained from rapid weight loss... Duran was announced at 178 pounds for the March '84 press conference... Duran came in looking like a sailor ready to walk the plank in shark infested water... Duran knew his was in trouble, but the $2.5 million dollar payday made it doable for him... NOW! Did Duran expect to get parked like a Chevy truck? Probably not, but he knew he was in for a ruff ride that evening in Vegas... Like Gil Clancy said following the KO: "Duran didn't have it from the opening bell."

MR.BILLbbb:hat

 

Duran would always have lost to Hearns. I'm not even giving Duran the benefit of the doubt and saying, 'well just because he's a great fighter and even better than Hearns as an all-time great he'd win once in every four fights, if they fought'.

 

Not like its debated for truth, but if you want a concrete proof example that 'styles make fights', Leonard - Duran - Hearns - Hagler, is as clear as it gets.

 

That's a good post, Mr Bill. Duran was simply not ready to fight in any way, shape or form. First thing I noticed was when he entered the ring is he went and sat on his stool in his corner. That in itself is a bad omen.

 

I love Duran but fans always make excuses for his losses. Oh he wasn't ready that time. Oh he had to take a **** that time. Oh that loss? He ate too much steak the night before.

Tommy Hearns was a monster and Duran decided to charge straigh at him, get inside and do work. Of course that didn't happen because Hearns smashed him before he ever got inside.

Sometimes fighters just fight a guy they aren't going to beat that day. Thats all.

 

Duran never faced a fighter with a right hand of Thomas Hearns. That is why he lost. Leonard does not hit like Hearns. Hagler does not. Benitez does not. Hearns predicted he would stop Duran in two. They asked Hearns how,and he said no one can take my punches and I punch harder than anyone Duran ever face. He also said Duran was great, but he didn't move his head enough and that he was going to be open for his right hand all night and that he wouldn't stand up to it. He was right.

 

clancy said this is an example of a fighter aging overnight. Just typical nonsense from Clancy. Duran fought another 35 times after Hearns and 17 more years. Nothing was going to get Duran to take Hearns right hand. Duran being stopped by Hearns right hand is what was expected. Hearns was known for his right. And Hearns hit him clean over and over again and quick. Duran could do nothing to win this fight.

 

excuses. none of those guys could punch like the champion hearns. Duran made excuses for Leonard 2, Benitez,Hearns, 3 of the greatest guys he fought and 3 of his more lopsided losses. If people do not see these are excuses by this point, what else is there left to say? Duran could beat Minchillo or Davey Moore, but not Hearns and Benitez. As Emanual Steward said most guys respected Duran. Tommy did not at all. Emanual said Tommy saw him as this little short guy who he was going to knockout easily. Really that is what Emanual said and Tommy believed it. Tommy went in there to knock out Duran early and he did it. No mystery.

 

It was about leverage. Tommy was a huge puncher who was naturally filling out and on his way to becoming a much larger man. Duran was a small man, who at 154 was really about as heavy as he could truly go without getting chunky. Of course, he went much higher, but really wasn't built for it. A guy who was a natural lightweight getting knocked out by someone who was eventually a cruiserweight...that's the story. Tommy's height made it easy to tag the 7 or 8 inch shorter Duran....it doesn't matter how good your chin is, when a massive puncher who is naturally larger than you hits you full force on the head, you will go down.

It was only an aberration in the sense that lightweights rarely fight guys who become eventual cruiserweights.

Would you pick Pernell Whitaker against a cruiser? No, you wouldn't.

 

hearns was 5 1/2 to 6 inches tall.. Not 7 or 8. Duran fought at 154 as early as 1978, before Hearns,Leonard or Benitez fought at 154. Tommy started to look soft at 168 by the way, and his power was best at 154. So to say Duran was this little guy who moved up and Tommy a natural cruiserweight is exaggerating. Duran and Hearns were champions at the same time in 1983-1984. They were equals in the ring more than people think, Tommy was just too quick.

 

why people make excuses for a fight like this i really don't know. just look at them:

http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgu...1&ndsp=17&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0&biw=1240&bih=655

 

this is right.

this is not.