Montreal Duran vs PBF at Welter

Hernandez was very good when Napoles beat him. Perkins had seen better days. This being aid 140 is historicaly an overrated divison. Napoles should do well at 140. There are a lot of boxers who stayed for only their championship fight or went from lightweight to welterweight bypassing (in some cases the division did not exest) light welterweight who would beat every "great" light welterweight.

 

Lol...oh so we're going to play the Internet snob guy game, OK sorry I wasn't aware I was in "your" forum. Man get the **** out of my face with this kindergarten bull****. In all seriousness who the **** are you to try and tell anybody ****? Matter of fact you post in the general all the time, I mean who you trying to impress?

Furthermore who said anything anything about "black athleticism"? So you dispute PBF's athletic ability and skill level, seriously...that's your point of contention? Oh and last thing you silly ignorant ***, I caught the "skillz" ****, the only problem is I'm white *****...like not just "white" but Southern US, Bible belt, biscuits and gravy white. Please with sugar on top STFU and get the **** outta my face, this is pathetic and you should be embarrassed.

Apologies to the other people in the thread, as demonstrated in my initial post this wasn't my intention. I'm embarrassed to have had to do that this early.

 

I dont think he'd hurt him either, but I don't think he has to hurt him per se'. Floyd certainly has the power to damage reckless fighters and that has been demonstrated throughout his career. Floyd can also use his aggressiveness against him, he can frustrate him, he can get Duran to a level emotionally where he makes mistakes and perhaps quits...it happened. Now before you get into a crazed frenzy I'm not trying to imply that PBF is Ray Leonard, or that Duran is a quitter, I'm saying the man is emotional and that can be a weakness against someone as intelligent as PBF. Floyd has the feet, legs, and skill level to do that. His timing and reflexes are on par with the greats of the sport, in my opinion.

As I said in my previous post I would favor Duran to win a close decision, but the swarming anal **** game plan has been tried multiple times by fighters of various skill levels and ability, and it's not been effective. Perhaps Duran is the guy that would be the exception to the rule...who knows?

 

Tread more carefully next time.

I run **** here, everyone else just lives here. And what's with the "**** out of my face" comment? You're staring at a computer screen.

No. I don't dispute any of that, I dispute your tone when mentioning them in relation to Duran's "toughness and aggression" or whatever the hell you said, as if that was all Duran had to offer in the face of Floyd's supposedly superior technical abilities. Fact is, Duran was the more skilled practitioner. Anyone who's seen enough of the man in his prime knows this. He didn't get by merely on a snarl, he was one of the most fundamentally skilled fighters that's ever laced up the gloves. It's that level of skill combined with that killer's mentality that sees him rated as highly as he is.

:rofl

Impressive.

I should be embarassed? I made a 3 sentence post in jest, you've gone on a 3 paragraph tirade.

Well, that makes sense.

 

Griffith and Cokes were both famed ring technicians, and Napoles outsmarted and exploited them both; he comprehensively shut them out, not through physical advantages but better thinking instead. He out-countered the counter puncher in Cokes and out-jabbed the superb jabber in Griffith while dictating the distance to Griffith's detriment. Personally, I can't see any way those two fighters could beat Napoles at any stage of their careers. And they are pretty big names to be beating so decisively.

Hedgemon Lewis, Red Lopez, Armando Muniz and Adolph Pruitt were all Briscoe/Hamsho/Lampkin level title defences and deserve credit by themselves. Napoles' other title opponents were also more than satisfactory as far as title challengers go, and let's not discount his non-title fights where he beat several formidable contenders. As champion, I'd rate Napoles' opposition above Carlos Monzon's.

The problem for Napoles was winning the title when he was nearly thirty. By that time he'd already had a good career's worth of fights and had beaten a **** load of challengers between 135 and 147lbs. Comparing his pre-title record with Marvin Hagler's (another avoided fighter), it's clear to see that Napoles dominates the numbers and probably in the class of opponent, too. Eddie Perkins is in the Hall of Fame. Carlos Hernandez was a stand-out challenger. Around fifteen other victories came against world rated opposition also.

Napoles ended up moving to welterweight for the simple reason that he wasn't getting a title shot anywhere else. He was known as a destructive, classy puncher, and rumour has it that Carlos Ortiz' management wanted absolutely no part of him.

By the way, Napoles was 113 or 114-1 in the amateurs, supposedly. I'm trying to gather more information about his early professional losses, but how about this? Napoles was beaten by Tony Perez, Alfredo Urbina and LC Morgan in his earlier career. He knocked them all out in return matches, quickly. Likewise; after thrashing Cokes he repeated the feat, and he regained the title off Backus in style. Hedgemon Lewis, Armando Muniz and Ernie Lopez gave Napoles varying degrees of trouble, and all of them were beaten more decisively in rematches. Napoles was not a man to fight twice.

On film, it might seem apparent that Napoles was easy to hit. To a limited extent, he was. He was an ultra advanced fighter who knew he could take risks. A virtuoso in there, really. Napoles was gifted with a jaw that could afford to soak up any mistakes made, but generally he was hard to clip with a clean shot, owing to his extraordinary head movement. Notice this; the man never blocks a punch. It's all ducking, slipping and shifting in and out of distance.

Some subtle skills are at work in Napoles' fights. His footwork is impeccable with regards to balance, maintaining distance and shuffling fighters to where he wants them. The jab is educated. Where Napoles excelled was in his eye for counter opportunities and his combination punching, which was at times very impressive and unbearable for his opponent. He had no weak punch in his arsenal, like all the real greats, and could throw them from any angle which ties in with the footwork.

If you were going to label him as anything, I suppose Napoles was a counter puncher, just one who was working on a different level to any other. The way he baited his head was fearless and demanded extra skill and sweetness. He was a deluxe counter puncher who happened to actually be great at nearly everything else on top.

Just be careful which fights you watch, because half of them show an ageing, drinking, shirking champion just doing enough to beat opponents he would've blitzed in his prime. Napoles in the late '60s was probably one of the best fighters of all time and for me, the pound-for-pound best in the world at that time. The 1964 knockout of Urbina shows a different fighter to the 1974 loser at the hands of Monzon.

 

Duran would relentlessly pressure Floyd like he did SRL. A fierce body assault, coupled with defensive prowess, would see Duran take an unquestionable UD. Talented as Mayweather is, he doesn't have the firepower to keep Roberto honest, while a fired-up Duran would have a little too much of everything for him.

 

Duran. One way traffic from the third.

 

Did you guys know that Duran was watching Ray Leonard on tv and actually said "I hate him i hate him i wanna beat the **** out of him" if he hated Ray Leonard what would he think of Floyd!

 

I was being sarcastic, neither fight was anywhere close to an epic due to Mayweather's tactics. The wideness of the decision in the first fight was a joke, I had it to JLC by 2, and then I had the appalling snoozefest marathon rematch to Floyd by 4. Both fights taken together say to me that stylistically Floyd is never going to beat prime versions of guys who fought in a similar style to Castillo but were vastly superior at it and had far greater attributes, such as the lw/ww Duran and the sfw/lw Chavez.

 

Re: Castillo-Floyd II; it seems a modern misconception that 'good boxing' is staying well out of punching range.

 

Mayweather UD - beats Duran to the punch time and again, makes Duran misses and counters, rinse repeat. Duran has his moments but Mayweather largely neutralises him and lands more clean punches to take a UD

The Castillo argument is a poor 1, for more than 1 reason. Mayweather says he was injured in the first fight with a shoulder injury, Roger also tells him to punch through the pain during the fight so that gives some credence to the story and he also had hand problems around this time. Then lets remember it's his first LW fight, Castillo was bigger having 10lbs on Floyd and Castillo is an underrated LW champ in his own right, not only giving Floyd close fights but KO'ing Corrales, beating/drawing with Stevie Johnston, beating Casamayor, beating Bazan, Julio Diaz and Lazcano when both were top contenders. That's a who's who of the LW division from 2000-2005. Castillo was a great lightweight and not simply Chavez's sparring partner, in that case is Larry Holmes only 'Ali's sparring partner'

 

A man with any integrity and self-respect would bow out of the forum quietly after making this post.

 

I'd say that Duran only loses out in one department to Floyd; handspeed. He'll get round his jab, feint him, and then drub him. Even in terms of defence, Durans was more proven (reflexes proven against offensive fighters of a higher calibre) and he wouldn't get hit with all the accurate stinging shots Floyd throws, especially as Floyd has little offensive variety.

Duran has way more tools to win this IMO. Decision over 12, stoppage over 15.

Very bad matchup for Floyd IMO.

Castillo was a very good 135lber. But not 'great' IMO.

 

I'd put Castillo about on par with Jose Luis Ramirez.A good tough workhorse lightweight.

Floyd should have looked better against him though imo.You get hand and shoulder issues fighting Duran and you're in serious trouble.especially without having major power or a dominating jab to fall back on.

 

Speed and reactions, longer arms, timing/straightness of punches probably equal. Duran has an elite defence but neither Leonard, Benitez or Hearns had too much trouble landing. Mayweather would use the Benitez gameplan, be more efficient, Duran may keep it pretty even with his pressure but down the stretch the more efficient fighter takes over