Hearns -Duran

But the prime Duran at LW aint any different from the WW version who fought Palamino and Leonard. He beat Leonard at WW anyway. So, when making fights between any fighters who fought at WW and Duran, no use asking them to fight the LW version is there? Kinda pointless.

Why ask someone like Hearns to boil down to LW to face Duran....you give off a distorted and confused picture. Just match them at WW. Get me?

 

Yeah, that's my point man!

A distorted picture indeed. I believe that the fight that took place between duran and hearns gave off a distorted picture. I'm saying duran at 154 is about as removed from his best as hearns would be at 135.

I'm not really a fan of duran tbh, didn't like the way he won his lightweight crown. I'm just putting my thoughts out there. I don't think his losses above 147 can be held against him.

 

If his wins are held in high esteem above 147, why can't his defeats be held against him to some degree? Ok he was getting older and past his prime, I know.

 

Older, past prime and way outside of his best division.

His losses to benitez and hearns came 20 pounds north of his prime weight. Any meaningful victory that far out of a comfort zone is amazing, any loss is to be expected truth be told.

If pac beat martinez it'd be amazing. If pac lost to martinez it wouldn't be held against him.

 

This always was going to be a horrific physical matchup for Duran. Reminds me a lot of Bob Foster vs Dick Tiger, too many physical advantages...

 

the speed was the main problem, then the leverage together was bad for Duran.