Roberto Duran vs Winky Wright @154

Not a great fight stylistically for Duran.Winky's tight defense and jab would give him problems.I see a close fight that could go either way.I am picking Duran by controversial split decision.

 

Barkley beat Hearns and Moore beat Benitez. How do you explain that?

 

This will be good

 

Well, I always look at head to head great fighter matchups. Hearns had his tough fights, and Duran had his . Same as Kirkland Laing beating Duran does not mean much, although if you look at Kirkland Laing he had good footwork, which is a problem for Duran. And I have always said, the great fighter matchups mean more than Benitez vs. Moore or Barkley vs. Hearns. I would think Duran would have been motivated for Hearns and beating him would have been a huge example of his greatness, which everyone seems to say he is top 10 ATG.. So, that and a Benitez win for Duran would have probably given him that top 10 ATG legitimately. Fact is Barkley beat Hearns, but Duran did not. Moore beat Benitez but Duran did not. And Moore fought Benitez in 1984 wasn't it? After the Hamsho fight, which was bad fight for Benitez to take and at middleweight.

 

Duran did not duck under the Hearns punches. Even if you look at an old Leonard in 1989,, who was older than Duran was in 1984,,, and that punch in round 3 which knocked Ray down which really was not a legit knockdown, Hearns pulled him down. When Hearns put that jab to Leonard's stomach like he did to Duran, Ray ducked under it and Duran was hit clean.

 

Sure. He should have been motivated, but one look at him in that fight, and you can tell that he wasn’t in the same shape that he was in Montreal.

Hearns presents a difficult challenge even for Duran in top form. The ridiculous reach advantage makes it really hard for Duran to counter effectively. Hearn’s speed makes it hard for Duran to slip all his punches. His KO power has to make Duran somewhat cautious. Having said that, Duran in top form has a chance at 147 if he can survive the first few rounds and find his rhythm.

 

It is always the same with Duran and his losses. If he did not train for Hearns, he might have known Hearns was too good and wanted to set up the excuse. I don't know. But for Duran, it is another excuse like for Benitez or Leonard or Hearns etc etc. Duran was the champion at 154 at the same time Hearns was . This was a unification. Everytime he lost to a great he made an excuse, because he knew the loss on it's own would affect his legacy and should.

 

Excuses or not, it was quite obvious that he wasn’t in the same shape.

We are talking about two different issues here:

You are talking about Duran’s lack of decorum. Of course he shouldn’t make excuses. If he wasn’t able to prepare adequately he shouldn’t have taken the fight. I don’t disagree with you on that.

I’m talking about the physical attributes of both fighters. The reality is that Duran never was the same after the second Leonard fight. Duran at 154 was fat. Hearns at 154 was all muscle. Duran began his career weighing in the low 130s. Hearns began his welterweight career weighing about 145. He grew into the higher weight classes. Duran did grow somewhat into the welterweight. He did appear to be quite lean and cut in Montreal, but not in New Orleans i.e. same weight but less muscle and more fat. Beyond that he was never again the lean mean fighting machine he had been before. And I know you are bring up that fight that he fought in the 70s at 154. That was nothing more than a tune up fight against a nobody, so he didn’t need to be in top form. He had a habit of letting his weight go between major fights.

 

Yeah but it leads to the same thing, and you were talking about being in shape. That is has always been the excuse for Duran. Duran fought at 154 before Ray,Tommy and Wilfred did. All of them grow in the higher weight, you are using height as some sort of magical weight gainer, not bones structure. If you look at Hearns at 175 against Hill. he was still much smaller bone structure. I think Duran looked decent against Benitez in 1982. He still fought there, which means he could, which is significant.

 

Winky ud

 

I’m not using height as a magical indicator of what they should weigh.

Let’s compare Benítez and Duran regardless of their height:

Benitez began his career at 17 in the light welterweight division, which is around 140
Duran at 17 was in the lightweight division, often weighing in the low 130s
I doubt that Benitez could have fought at LW without dehydrating himself or losing muscle mass.

As fighters mature they can put on more muscle, so for Duran to go up to 140 or even 147 is not unusual, but 154 is quite a stretch. He was always up against stronger fighters. By the same token Benitez could easily go up to 147 or 154, but 160 would be too much.

Likewise Hearns began at 147, so going up to 154 was an easy move. He even said he felt a lot stronger at that weight. 160 at first seemed like a good weight for him until he went up against someone who could handle all that he could deliver (Hagler). Going up to LHW was quite a challenge for him. He no longer had that vast reach advantage, and he was up against individuals that were a lot harder to take out with one punch. It was quite a testament to his boxing skill that he could win at LHW.

 

Yes Hagler’s reach was 75”, just 3” less than Hearns (78”) Leonard’s reach was 74”. Benítez was 70”. Duran 66”

Surprising that Hagler wasn’t able to use the reach advantage against Duran the way Hearns did.

Also of note is that Benitez had a very short reach considering his height. In retrospect, it was surprising that he didn’t go down against Hearns the way Duran did. Perhaps because he stuck to a more defensive strategy. He didn’t land a single punch in the first round, and there was also a question about Hearn’s hand being hurt.

 

I agree with you on Benitez, I doubt he could make 135, but at the same time I don't think Benitez could fight at 168 like Duran did, and Duran looked like he went up to 250 after retirement. I don't know if it was a stretch for Duran at 154. I always thought his power was always good. He had a decent right hand even at 160... Barkley said Duran punched well, and Pazienza said so. He was not this weak guy, even at higher weights. I honestly think Hearns hurt himself moving up and down so. He fought Hagler, then Shuler 160, then Medal 154, then Dewitt 160 again,,, then months later at 175.. Andries, then back down to 160 for Roldan. then 2 fights later 168.. Too much up and down.Had he stayed at 160 for a long time I think his power would have settled down like it seemed to be getting more when he fought Barkley in 1988.

 

Duran was much slower at light heavy.

 

Benitez was a counter puncher with amazing reflexes, his fight with Hearns was a chess match, Duran couldn`t do that because of his reach, Duran was awesome at slipping shots but he was a counter/pressure fighter, he would walk towards his opponent like he did to Moore, offer his chin make them miss then counter, he was bound to get hit more than Benitez using this tactic vs the long armed Hearns, whereas Benitez sat back and tried to weight until Hearns left an opening.