Pipo Cuevas v Carlos Palomino

A key 1980 Sports Illustrated article to read re: Cuevas vs Hearns fight which explains some things. (but Cuevas never made any excuses... to his credit)
https://www.si.com/vault/1980/08/11...evas-to-win-the-wba-welterweight-championship
“As it turned out, Cuevas was the one who should have been worried. The last thing he had done before going to the arena was visit his mother's room, where she had blessed him and said, "Get it over with as soon as possible."

In the dressing room, Manager Lupe Sanchez and Mendoza both impressed upon Cuevas the importance of controlling his terrible temper. "For three rounds all I want you to do is feint and move," Sanchez told him.

"If he gets too close, grab him and hold; you're stronger. Stay cool."
And not once in the round did Cuevas lose his temper. "He hurt me twice," Cuevas told Sanchez in the corner, "but now I know I can take his punches. Soon I will do something."

"Not yet," Sanchez warned.”

Bonus: Hearns vs SRL build-up
https://www.si.com/vault/1981/04/20...reality-that-will-be-bad-news-for-ray-leonard

 

I'll take Pipino 8 out of 10 at the least. I think Palomino didn't hit hard enough to keep him at bay and was not a clear enough superior technico to keep him tied up in knots for 15 long rounds.

You can pick on Cuevas for getting bombed out by Hearns, but Palomino struggled in several defenses against Muniz, Green and Azevado and looked pretty workmanlike more times than not. I think Cuevas was a level above, but its a reasonably questionable matchup.

 

You could be right but basing it on that is a slippery slope in boxing. For example different styles but look at Bernard Hopkins and Felix Trinidad. Both fought William Joppy. Hopkins was workmanlike and won the fight clearly. Trinidad was spectacular driving Joppy into the canvas like a nail. It can be misleading.

Sometimes knockouts can lead you to overate a fighter while the workmanlike guy gets overlooked. Another example would be Holyfield and Tyson. They both fough Alex Stewart. Who would you have picked to win their match based on their performance against Stewart? Just something to consider

 

Or if you watched Barkley vs Hearns and Duran, would you have expected such an easy KO by Hearns?

 

And also Barkley to beat Hearns.

 

Good article.

His corner gave him bad advice. His only chance was to go straight at him, as Hagler did. Could he have won that way? Probably not. He couldn’t absorb Hearns’ punches the way Hagler could, but he at least would have a puncher’s chance.

 

His speed and his reach allowed him to get away that risk-taking style. I mean he could land his bombs against those shorter guys when they were still too far away to hit back.
Somehow Duran did manage to get inside for a couple of shots, but it wasn’t enough.

 

Duran had that great timing and knew how to do land punches when he had to. but it was not enough like you said. It is not always enough if you fight a great. Most fighters who go for the knockouts will leave themselves open. Hearns was a great fighter, but his style was so risky at times. They said he had a weak chin, and then I would see him brawling guys late in his career. I never saw his chin as weak as much as later undependable.. He didn't have to have it tested. He just wanted to entertain.

 

Yea Duran got in a couple of rights at least one decent one. Maybe Duran being so hurt didn't have as much on it as he normally would. Hearns showed a good chin there. He didn't even blink

 

In 1980 at 147 Duran has a better chance. When Hearns moved up to 154, that was 7 lbs more muscle, not an ounce of fat. On the other hand Duran is older, slower, less muscular, and carrying a ton of fat at 154.

 

Here is an example. Look at those pictures comparing 1980 to 1984:
1980: Duran is 12 lbs heavier than his prime weight of 135, but he still has definition. He is muscular, perhaps even somewhat stronger than he was at 135


1984: here he is only 7lbs heavier, but he’s lost all definition. He looks flabby. Not only is he fat but he also has less muscle:

It is clear to me that those were 2 different Durans.

Now I’m not saying that he could have beaten Hearns in 1980, just that he had a much better chance. He still has to face the long reach, the speed, and the devastating punching power. A tall order.

Edit: I wasn’t able to post the pics, but i’ll try again later.

 

Cuevas almost landed a couple....if he did Tommy probably would have went down. If Hearns had Haglers chin he might not have lost. Barkley' shot was wicked though, and could have KO'd anyone.

 

Pipino by stoppage

Palomino is better technically but his only chance in this fight is his great body punching....but to do that he has totbe in range. I just can't see him avoiding those bombs for an entire fight and once Cuevas had you hurt he was in killer mode

 

Since Cuevas, one of my faves, is getting some love... how about a Pipino bout I bet none of you have seen before?

This content is protected