If Duran had beaten Hagler...

more so for me losing to sims, lang, etc.

new orleans will always hurt him most i agree but that was his ****ing quitting, not his ability that night. some of his other loses are more of a black mark simply because he should have outclassed completely many fighters he lost to and couldn't.

 

no worries, just scrapped it together from old notes:

greb
robinson
armstrong
langford
ali
charles
pep
duran
benny leonard
jones (knocking on the door: fitz)

the people are essentially locked, except for jones who very well should be off the list but i want to respect his talent. fitz should be on for achievements over different weights but i'm held back for a few reasons

 

Back in 83 it was a given that if Duran had won he would have been acclaimed as the GOAT contender alonside SRR as he'd have been the 1st to 4 genuine world crowns juxtaposed achieving what was thought impossible in surviving Hagler never mind beating him & especially after the self-inflicted humiliation of new orleans & Laing/Batten debacle's.

It would'nt have been the case as to question haglers limitations as thats just modern day revisionism, it would have been the case of Durans undoubted brilliance as a fistic craftsman who again beat the odd's. If Duran had won then his next fight was to be against Leonard who'd publicly stated that if Duran won he was def coming back so we would have had Duran/Leonard III Mega-Fight in 84 & i very much doubt (Hopefully) that Duran would have resorted to his "all you can eat & drink buffet" lifestyle knowing that he had the chance too beat the **** out of leonard when he still had something to offer & the Duran that fought Hagler would have beaten Leonard over 15 rounds & you've only got to go look at Leonard/Howard in 84 to know that.:deal

 

to be honest, i think you are. in 10 fights i see tommy winning 9, most by knockout. duran rolls, slicks, feints and lands enough lead rights in maybe one of those to take a decision. at 154, he just wasn't a one punch bomber and he was NEVER going to get to tommy consistently enough to wear him down

 

Sims was a bigger, younger, faster, ranked MW contender and Duran was right there. No shame there -and let's qualify this by remembering that the man was in his 20th year as a professional, fighting 25 lbs over his division.

This isn't directed at you, but to hear modern fighters and their fans go on about 41 lousy fights in 10 lousy years talking about how experienced they are, how consistent they are, how unbeatable they are --it makes me giggle like a school girl.

That being said, Duran's quitting, losing to Laing, Lawlor, etc. it's all the same principle, as 30 approached, he lost his discipline. That's a flaw that he paid for as his body aged. I have a category called "Intangibles" that I think we should consider in such rankings. Duran's cannot be near say Ezzard's...

 

The Duran that fought Hagler was only the 2nd time i'd ever seen Duran in absolutly top shape & he knew he had to be & the other occasion was when he beat Leonard up in Montreal. I've always been of the mind that Duran would KO/TKO Hearns at 147 & you've only got to watch the 6th round of the SRL/Hearns showdown in 81 when Leonard decided to stop poncing about doing his Ali imitation & went after Hearns & battered him all around the ropes with the bell saving Hearns.

 

this is very hard to say get my thinking across really because it is absolutely not a slight on duran since he shouldn't have been above WW anyways.

but by showing his limitations above 147 he found a ceiling for himself considering how little time he spent at WW IMO.

beating Hagler would have been great, but it's hard to overlook the unavenged defeats he suffered at 154.

as for the loss to hearns, in H2H comparisons it means nothing to me because it was an old duran vs a prime hearns at his best weight, to put into context, take an old hearns, boil him down to LW and see how he handles a 1975 duran in the ring. it would be an equal blowout in favour of duran.

what you have to consider is that, by and large, duran was not very good at LMW, robinson avenged pretty much every defeat at MW until he was shot. Duran kind of moved on after his losses but looking back, it's clear to see he wasn't a LMW force. maybe he had the gifts to be (see him against moore) but history shows he wasn't and this limits how high he can be ranked.

 

Not at 147 pal:nono the Duran that handed Leonard his arse in montreal would jump all over Hearns just like leonard did but better:bbb

Where's talking about Duran at his best & not the fat drunk who turned up for a payday. Duran ai'nt going to stand upright like a fossilised tree as Cuevas did.

 

He did!

 

**** off

 

Firstly it wouldn't happen because Hagler was being cautious more than anything BUT really Hagler wouldn't be seen as that much if he lost to Duran. Duran would have to rematch Hearns/Benitez or have the rubber with Leonard or get in with McCallum, all 4 are beating him and his stock drops down again.

Stop talking our your ass, Hagler would have stepped it up earlier and still won the UD. Leonard did what Duran couldn't, face up to it and stop crying. FFS it's like saying if it was a 9000m race instead of a 10,000m race, athlete X would have won. Are you really that dumb?

 

Just a rose tinted pretentious wanker really.