Roberto Duran bites off more than he can chew

The difference between Hearns and Barkley is a few levels beyond immense.

 

I thought this was an ode to Tyson and Holyfield when I saw the title.

 

Strong competition between his fights against Cuevas and Shuler.

 

The people around him said the same thing, after his loss to DeJesus, after he quit in New Orleans, his losses to Benitez, Hagler , Hearns etc.
A pattern if I ever saw one. If he were foolish enough not to take Hearns seriously, knowing how great he was, and with all his physical advantages.
Who's fault would that be?
Duran didn't get to the point he was by not taking his dangerous opponents seriously .
It's beyond unlikely he wouldn't take Hearns serious.

 

Duran, even had he taken this fight seriously and trained like he should have, would not have won vs Hearns.
A very bad stylistic matchup for Duran.

 

But he didnt. He didnt take several seriously Kirkland Laing, Pat Lawler, Jeff Lanas, etc. He didnt take Hearns seriously for the reasons Ive already listed. But like Gil Clancy said he proved he was one of the best fighters that ever lived by beating Barkley who aside from speed, Hearns had no real advantage over and was the same size.