Roberto Durán (Carlos Palomino/Montreal) Vs Jose Nápoles (Curtis Cokes I)

Duran ... a bit better ...

 

At welterweight , Duran started his hit-and-miss era.

Meanwhile Napoles was one of the best Welterweights in history.

I would say this is like Arguello vs Sanchez. Its not that Arguello was better all around but he is more proven at Lightweight (Sanchez had no time to prove himself, to be fair but still, Arguello was not that far off Sanchez talent-wise). Napoles is far more proven at Welterweight.

 

One of the greatest fights you’d be able capture on film but Napoles would win this, Napoles was unreasonably good when he was sober. Duran at 147lbs in the 60s would fit right in with Cokes, Napoles, Griffith and Luis etc.

 

How so?

 

Duran...his display against Palomino was the best display of all around boxing i ever witnessed.

 

Stronger, faster, harder hitting, tougher ... don't forget Napoles was himself a blow up lightweight ...

 

Arguello was just as talented if not more talented than Sanchez. I was a big fan of both but remember that Sanchez died at the beginning of his career. Arguello was a boxer who put in a lot of rounds between 1973-1982. Truthfully he was a bit worn down by 1980. His promoters, just like Duran’s promoters, had Arguello taking lots of non-title fights in between titles fights. Arguello actually started to show signs of slowing down against Mancini. Look at him against Espinosa from just a few years prior and then compare that to him against Mancini. Most fighters should be going into there primes at ages 27-28 years old but Hispanic boxers like Duran and Arguello were wearing down in their late 20’s because they were badly mismanaged.

 

This matchup took me a some time to think about. Duran versus Napoles would be one of the best matchups possible between 135-147. To get to the point, I have Duran by decision, but I could see these two boxers in a 5 fight series that goes 3-2 in favor of Duran. Both men would be a threat to anyone in boxing history from 135-147. Why do I think that Duran would win? Both men are/were about the same size. Napoles had the reach, but less of a reach advantage over Duran than Leonard, Hagler or Hearns had over Duran. Duran fought evenly or beat everyone he ever fought who were his size or smaller until his late 30’s. Duran would outwork Napoles and box on even terms for most of the bout. But it’s not so simple. The question was who would win between the Duran who fought Palomino or the Napoles who fought Cokes. It’s possible Napoles would be the fresher boxer in this match. Napoles had a total of 88 fights in his career. He turned pro in 1958 and Napoles was 29 years old fought Cokes. Duran had a total of 119 fights in his career and was 28 years old when he fought Palomino. My concern for Duran in this hypothetical matchup is that Napoles may be the fresher boxer. Duran fought 40 opponents from Ken Buchanan in 1972 until he faced Palomino in 1979. Duran fought an astonishing 35 times AFTER beating Buchanan in 72 to when he defeated Dejesus in 78. Now you can say that some of those 40 bouts were against tomato cans, but even a bum will give 100% if he thinks a win could change his life. But the fact is that Duran went onto the Palomino bout razor focused. I have Duran, but you cannot just ignore the wear and tear on Duran at that point. . Napoles resume after Cokes was ridiculous for a welterweight his age. Jose would definitely be a very worn out by 1975, but I bet that old fighter would be a real threat today.

 

The Duran who defeated SRL and Palomino would beat Napoles in a brilliant match up that would long live in the memory.

 

I tend to agree, but the Napoles who fought Cokes did not have the wear and tear that Duran had when he fought Palomino. Floyd jr had truly 49 fights as a pro. Duran had almost as many f

 

Duran fought the fight of his life a year and 4 fights later against Leonard. Supposed wear and tear meant exactly zero vs Leonard, Duran was phenomenal.