How good was Duran - P4P GOAT?

Duran happens to be my all-time favourite fighter, but Whitaker would have been too damn good for him at 135lbs. His ring generalship and overall speed, combined with sublime reflexes. Too much for Duran to handle.

And regarding Duran's power. No way can he KO Whitaker with a single blow. Duran did have very good power at lightweight, but most of his stoppages came after 10 rounds when fighters were mentally and physically drained with the pace Duran set. Accumulation of shots took its toll more than anything.

I can't see how Duran manages to hit Whitaker enough to A) win enough rounds, and B) slow down Whitaker enough to force a stoppage.

Whitaker's mobilty and razor sharp reflexes, Duran's worst nightmare. Whitaker's whole style was to take away an opponents strengths in everyway possible, and making them miss punches was his main attribute. And as good a pressure fighter Duran was, he wasn't quite superman.

Whitaker hits Duran, more than vice versa. Whitaker also never had stamina issues and was pretty much a finely tuned boxing machine over 12 rounds.

 

Sorry, Duran's worst nightmare was Hearns (reach, power and speed). I don't think Whitaker would have been worse than that. I'd give Duran a better than 50% chance at beating anyone at LW. Duran was pretty quick at that weight plus he had the intensity, power and elusiveness, which many people don't see. It would be close though.

 

I'd hardly call such a decimation lucky. Stylistically Hearns was a nightmare in this one.

 

Agreed. Hearns would have steamrolled Duran at whatever place and time. Hearns was a nightmare for whoever he ever faced. Although, Hagler was the only one who had the physical capability and capacity to figure him out. The other guys who beat Hearns got a beating of a lifetime in doing so.

 

Yeah, and Frazier avenged his bad-luck loss to Foreman by having beat the man who owns Foreman's ass, Ali.

 

Sorry dude. Iran was busted up so bad the first time it was painful. It looked like Hearns was going to end it until Iran starched him with a lucky wild shot. You can't convince me otherwise.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ys6_2wWdWy8

 

Let us not forgot that when it comes to "performance against larger men" -Burley whipped a man 70 pounds heavier in '42 (Turner) and was never stopped. Granted this big man was no world beater. He had as many losses as wins.

I don't see Burley as having quite reached Duran in terms of accomplishments. Perhaps if Robinson gave him a shot we would see more, or Cerdan, or Conn. Burley is more of an X-factor. One manager of his potential rivals actually stooped so low as to buy Burley's contract to keep his stable in tact.

As to his style, he fought eerily similarly to Jones --jumping in and jumping out, moving backwards, leaning backwards, hands down. However, he combined this unorthodox presentation with more skill in my opinion and he would fight any man alive. Not so Jones.

There are rules now, that's why they didn't try. Different era. I think that Duran would have & Lamotta was enough of a nut to try as well.

No, we disagree here. Ali was a fluke, a phenomenon -not an example of HW potential. He was unprecedented and unrepeatable. Even so, his level of skill pales compared to Robinson, who was his idol.

I am absolutely convinced that the HW skillset is inferior to LW, WW, or MW. There are a few reasons for this. One is that HWs are more prone to rely on power. They are big men and have less endurance, which means less output. They typically are simply "looking for the shot" -watch any sample of journeymen big man bouts. Mirror images.

Another, bigger reason, is simple demographics. Most men are not 6'4 and 220 pounds... there are fewer in the pool and therefore there can only be fewer with true talent -talent that transcends power and physical strength anyway. Is it any wonder that most of the great HWs were known for exactly those assets -Louis, Liston, Foreman, Lewis, Tyson, Dempsey, Marciano, Jeffries, Sullivan... their power was their lynchpin. Tunney, Ali, and yes, Holyfield ... these were exceptions.

I would guess that in the 20th century, the middleweight division was the most formidable. Why? Because most of the participants in the sport had an average size of 5'9, 175. Train that average sized man down and you have a middleweight. Now, in the 21st century, I see the lower weights as becoming the demographic to watch out for... why? The Hispanic peoples are swelling the ranks -and they are naturally smaller men -5'6, ~130lbs (to wit: Duran). So now that lower weights have more skill and greatness among them. Barrera has more skill in his sleep than Klitscko ever will.

...and then he took about 9 years off to sit on his throne and eat tasty mailmen and pazmanians while his fans, with their ADD, glorified the flash and pizazz and overlooked the dearth of substance.

Not at all. Consider the measures:

1. level of skill
2. dominance at natural weight
3. longevity
4. performance against larger men
5. formidability of challengers
6. win ratio during prime
....

Duran does well here -very well. You are apt to remove him from the top because of his "win ratio" and again, are not controlling for his age and the size and elite status of his challengers. I don't believe that Duran had any business in there against Hagler. The age and length of career factor, natural weight, Hagler was near prime and is consistently ranked top 3 MWs all time. Strength, power, etc., etc.

Keep in mind that making Greb and Tunney comparable is telling me that you need to go back 60 years. And Greb is often in the top 5!

It is simply more special to be ranked at 5 than 25 and surely more than 50. Being ranked at #5 is exactly 10 times more special than being ranked at 50. Unless you are a communist. Are you a communist?

Let us then control for likelihood of success. Augustine listed exactly that as a necessary ingredient in his "just war" treatise. Duran's losses, while not to be tritely excused or dismissed for the good of his glory, should be considered in context.

Had Hannibal came back 9 years after Zama and after many sorry defeats, and had one more glorious victory, should he not have more statues erected in his honor? Would you not be hard-pressed not to put him a bit higher in your rankings instead of lower?

Who didn't?

Where do you rank Robinson among the MWs? Tread carefully here, my friend.

There are other things I know more about.
And this is nary a matter of "right" and "wrong"... it is a matter of presenting cogent and persuasive argumentation. You have. I have as well. Whose is more weighty is for individuals to sort out.

Duran happens to be a controversial character --a romantic figure who plummetted to the depths and rose again like a phoenix only to plummet again. He is loved and despised. Revered and rebuked and I am not one to deny anyone's right to either. I revere him and rebuke him readily.

I will say that Duran's failures were as unprecedented as his glories. But those triumphs -even that singular loss to Hagler- and that skill, are breath-taking for anyone from novices to crusty old stogie smokers.

Breath-taking --but only when you fully consider the context of these performances.

HA! Excellent.

**** those ignorant mutha-****in' ****s. Our disdain for stupidity should transcend any disdain for foul language, yes?

 

Whitaker wouldn't beat Duran.

He wouldn't for more than one reason, but for the sake of argument, I will use your reasons why Whitaker will win to account for why he will not win. His lack of mobility accounts for one. You are err when you tout Whitaker's mobility as a key tool against Duran.

Whitaker was very elusive -but he was not a runner. He stayed in punching range more often than not and that allows Duran to pressure him and bang on him enough to wear him down and eventually force him to make a stand and punch. And then the little windows will open and Duran will find them when he isn't forcing them.

A note/ regardless of how defensively sound a man is, defense is inversely related to offense. The more you punch -or are forced to punch- the more opportunities you present.

Those razor-sharp reflexes of Sweet Pea's are also a non-factor here. Duran will miss and won't give a damn because he's throwing 6 punch combinations -4 of which are going to the body and 1 of which will stray down to the hip. Great reflexes only matter when the man punching is at a range where you can see and anticipate. Remember Ali-Williams? Everyone was so impressed. Be less so. Had that Ali fought a "stick-to-your-chest" Frazier, Ali would have been swelling up good. Believe that.

How is Whitaker going to keep Duran off of him?

Is there any doubt who is the stronger man here?

Does Whitaker's skill so far exceed Duran's that a prime Duran would be outclassed?

Watch Duran in 78. DeJesus III. I would argue that Duran indeed had more skill than Whitaker -he mastered the fundamentals and combined that with an indomitable will, serious power combined with an offensive onslaught reminiscent of both Ike Williams and perhaps even Harry Greb himself, a granite chin, conditioning, and versatility.

You are amazed by the defensive masters. I count Duran among them and have to say that his defense exceeded most of his peers precisely because it was apparant at the same time that he was in offensive mode. He was slipping and rolling at the same time he is throwing shots -be they big or subtle.

Whitaker had a great skill, but his was more talent-focused. He had beautiful reflexes, timing, and would set up shots based on how his man is likely to respond -and then counter him when he did respond as expected. In my gym, this is called "leading" and it is extremely sophisticated. However, Duran did this too... but it was mixed in with a body to head onslaught surrounding the technique. Whitaker would pop it and then step back and admire it. You admired it too.

But how is either you or him going to admire beautiful slick moves when Duran is all over Whitaker like a cheap Panamanian suit?

If there is one reason why Whitaker won't win it is because he did not have the kind of power that would keep Duran at bay. Nor did he have the strength. Duran will get inside, make no mistake there, and Pernell will not be the master inside. Those reasons, and the other reasons listed above, make this
an interesting fight
with a foregone conclusion
-especially over 15.

 

Whitaker's lack of mobility?. I question your judgement on that statement. Whitaker would stand in the pocket with his opponents and trade, he was also known for standing flat-footed at arms length. But he could move fluidly in all directions. Laterally, and going backwards. He never just went into full defensive mode while moving and stopped throwing punches. He could box extremely well while backing up in a straight line. Crisp jabs cracking home as his opponent backed him up.

Whitaker wasn't a runner?. It was those such tactics which he was critisized for when was robbed against Ramirez, winning around 8-9 rounds exclusively behind the jab, before standing his ground to unleash quick flurries to the body and head, then get on his bike again. Whitaker's foot movement and circling the perimeter of the ring was his meal ticket for the entire fight.

Also watch his fight against Nelson. This will quite possibly change your view on Whitaker's so called lack of mobility.

Duran doesn't have it to make Whitaker stand and trade, nobody does. The only fighter who made Whitaker stand and throw bombs with him was Trinidad, but to make such a comparison is out of the question. Whitaker was years past his prime. Movement was eroded, reflexes gone, and his speed a thing of the past. His recovery powers still excellent, as he got off the canvas and fought with a broken jaw for most of the 12 rounds. It depends how effective Duran was at cutting down the ring, combined with Whitaker's decision making. But Whitaker has the all round ability and ring generalship to decide if he wants to stand and trade leather.

Ken Buchanan was a decent mover behind the jab, but was straight up and down like a telephone pole. Very open to the head, and he couldn't cover up anywhere near as effectively as Whitaker inside. Whitaker often went into a crouch when he dropped inside and covered up with both hands protecting his head and ribs.

Versatility?. Whitaker was one of the most versatile fighters to step in the ring. Both his performances against Ramirez support this to a high degree. Seen the rematch?. Whitaker's defense and punch volume, a lesson and domination over 12 rounds. He stood in front of Ramirez and smoked him to the body and head with various 3-4-5 punch flurries while slipping punches at the same time. Ramirez was so aware of Whitaker's offense, punches were seldom coming the other way.

And before you shake your head, these tactics would not be wise against Duran who eat people for breakfast who dared to use such a strategy. Due to Duran's lack of serious one punch knockout power, Whitaker could get away with standing his ground during those moments Duran closed the distance. Although only briefly.

How is Whitaker going to keep Duran off him?

Whitaker doesn't have the power to keep Duran at bay, agreed. But power he wouldn't need, as his style and defensive awareness were his main weapons. It seems your envisioning Duran coming forward aggressively like a bull and throwing bunches of punches. Whitaker's built in radar would keep Duran well and truely in check more often than not. Judgement of distance and the ability to anticipate an opponents oncoming rushes were what made Whitaker a very special genius.

I once seen Whitaker show defensive awareness against Nelson which left me speechless. A moment during the fight Whitaker was cornered and knew if he went further back he would have been against the ropes. Whats was coming next, a serious assulat from both hands in his direction. Whitaker sagged back into the ropes and crouched down while bringing his guard up to protect himself from headshots, tucking the elows into the side of the body. Then came Nelson's blistering assault from both hands. All missed or blocked. Its just his anticiaption, and how well he went into his defensive posture miliseconds before punches were zoomed his way. Genuis.

Lets not forget, Duran would be sharing a ring with one of the best defensive fighters ever to grace the sport. Perhaps the greatest.

Not a foregone conclusion. Whitaker aint Buchanan or De Jesus.

 

When I stated that Whitaker had a lack of mobility, I thought it was clear from the ensuing sentences that he was not a runner -this is actually complementary. His defense was Pep-like --in the pocket. You state that he would stand and trade and would stand flat footed. He also moved laterally, fluidly, etc. This is not disputed. Whitaker was a true artist who had supreme confidence. He did not avoid exchanges, he sought to make you miss and pay.

Whitaker should not be considered a runner. Elusive yes, but a runner? No. The tapes are clear on this. Need confirmation? Go watch Ramirez II or Chavez --arguably his best performances.

The Nelson fight is more confirmation of my argument. You are confusing being a runner with using angles and elusive movement. Whitaker wasn't simplistic -he was sophisticated. Simply staying out of range and running around is simplistic.

Duran "doesn't have it to make Whitaker stand and trade"? I couldn't disagree more. Whitaker would trade with Duran partly because Duran's style during his prime would not allow Whitaker to stay away all night and Whitaker would oblige him by at least getting in the pocket enough.

Duran was 21 and that is besides the point. Whitaker never faced anything nearly as formidable as Duran when it comes to pressure, heavy hands, durability, conditioning, and defense.

Have you seem Duran-Palomino??

Duran's shots hurt. Barkley is three times as strong as Whitaker and down he went in round 11. Leonard attested to the power. He wouldn't need 1 shot power...

I don't think you understand what Duran was. You are simplifying him woefully.

Duran-Cuevas. Cuevas throws a blistering 5 punch combination at Duran who is directly in front of him. Duran slips all 5 by about an inch and then throws a right -Cuevas is hurt, then Duran pivots to his right and lands a textbook left hook. There are alot of examples of this for Whitaker but far more from Duran who had far more fights.

And what would Whitaker face? A complete fighter who is arguably in the top 2 from the last 60 years.

And Duran is Ramirez or Nelson?

 

.

 

Stonehands. I don't know how to quote each paragraph, so replied underneath with slopping letters so my points stood out, but it aint happened

 

Pernell Whitaker has the better lightweight resume IMO, i mean from 1975-1977 duran fought no one, just 2nd rate contenders. Pernell whitaker beat the better fighters at this weight class.

 

How do you view a match between them both going at lightweight?