The Brawl in Montreal - who would defeat Duran on that night?

One of my favourite eras,Duranimal.

 

What I said was spot on... He went toe to toe.. with a worse Duran than we have in this thread. Not only was he further past his prime weight and best.. but didn't look in the best shape for the fight just going on looks. Point is, just like I said.. He tried to mix it up with Duran in both rounds.. that is what Tommy tended to do at times and it cost him dearly at times. Trying to do that.. which he would... espeically with as much crap as Duran talked.. would be a terrible strat for Hearns... Sure it worked against a blown up past his best duran.. but against this version of duran.. that is a terrible idea.. but he would still go toe to toe most likely.. and get caught by Duran.

 

The one that was on HBO lol

Seriously, his overall record vs. good fighters sticks out. He knew how to win vs. other guys that knew how to win and he proved it time and time again over the course of several years. He fought as a pro between 1887-1911.

Ryan turned pro at age 16 at 140 Lbs. He fought at WW and MW. 5'7 1/2" with a long 73" reach. 90-5-12 (71) overall and 18-1-1 (14) in World Title Fights at WW and MW. He only stopped once, LKOby15 Charles Kid McCoy for the MW Title... they also had 2 draws (D5 and D6). He fought good fighters like-

Mysterious Billy Smith, Nonpareil Jack Dempsey, Charles Kid McCoy, Jack Root, and Philadelphia Jack O'Brien. He fought some of them several times.

I think he has a chance vs. Duran. Why not?

 

I commented on Milton McCrory qand Duran could beat Milton. Tommy would always beat Duran. Hearns had 78 1/2 inch reach opposed to 72 for Milton, and was quick and was sharp and just a guy who went for the knockout. You think Tommy Hearns would have had a draw with Colin Jones? I don't think Duran could get inside on Hearns without getting hit with the right hand and hurt. If you are going to beat Hearns you have to be able to hurt him like Leonard,Barkley,Hagler and not be hurt. You have to take the punch. Duran could not. I give Duran credit when I think he can beat someone and Milton McCrory he would beat. But not Hearns. Hearns was a different level than Milton and it is the same as I don't think Milton could ever beat Wilfred Benitez or Cuevas.

With Duran, Tommy did start off going for it and then settled down and started to counterpunch. When he did that, that was his advantage. For some exchanges or two Duran was in range. Even Hearns in that fight with Duran almost got into what Duran wanted yes, but Hearns started to jab and make Duran step inside and with Duran standing straight up Tommy landed easily. Once Tommy hurt Duran, Duran was not going to be stepping inside as much because he knew Tommy could hurt him.

The difference with Hearns and Leonard against Duran when you say Duran talked crap is Hearns harder punching. Ray could not hurt Duran to the point of knocking him out and Hearns could. That extra punching power was significant.

My point is I was talking about Duran vs. Milton. and Duran would win as he would against Donald Curry. To beat Duran significantly you had to be great and fast.. Guys like Milton and Donald would not do it. I will tell you one fighter I think who was good would lose to Duran. Nigel Benn. I always thought stylewise Duran would beat Benn and stop him in 9 or 10 rounds.

 

Ho Joo version of Kalule.Bit too smooth and crafty.

Duran wouldn't even see the uppercut\straight left combo coming.

 

they were no better than trinidad delahoya and moseley!!!!! they just got more press becasue it was right after the Muhammad Ali era and heavyweights were no good then so we had to focus on someone!!!. no one would have cared about Duran or Hearns or Hagler or Leonard had Holmes had great heavyweights to fight like Frazier or Foreman!!!!!!! but he didnt and there you have the fabulous four!!!!! All fighters are intense not just the fab four of the eighties!

 

So you don't the version of Duran in this thread is more likely to catch Hearns than the version that Tommy did beat? You don't think they were too different animals in there with Duran and SRL?

You admit tommy mixed it up.. how can you not see this might be his undoing against Duran. Once SRL hurt tommy.. Tommy stopped being aggressive and going for the KO and just tried to outbox Duran. That is why the fight would be different... Duran woudl hurt Tommy just the same... and then Hearns would go on his bike.. He wouldn't KO duran with the strat. You're not KOing duran off your backfoot and being crowded on the inside. No way.

SRL and Barkely had better chins than Duran? Based on what?

 

The fab four was popular because the heavyweights were not great in the 1980's? I don't know about that. Those 4 guys with Benitez were unique. I don't know how else I can defend it. That is a rather simplistic way to look at 4 great fighters. Honestly. I always respected smaller weight fighters more. Heavyweights were always lazy and didn't have weight limits to keep them disciplined. Hopkins accomplishment winning his title at 46 was in my mind much better than Foremans in 1994.

 

Do you really think the punching power of Ray and Tommy is not a different animal? Duran beating Ray in June 1980 regardless of Ray fighting the wrong style still is not beating Hearns who had a 78 1/2 inch reach and was fast and had much more power than Ray. Ray beat Hearns, but that Ray also beat Duran easily. Like I always said, Duran was never as great as Leonard.. The wins Ray has against Benitez,Hearns,Hagler prove this.


Ray in 1984 would have gone the distance with Duran the same night Tommy knocked him out. No one ever knocked out Duran like that, even guys who fought him 10-15 years later. Ray beat Duran easily in the rematch. And Tommy would have used his jab and landed the right the same way at welterweight as he did at junior middleweight which Emanuel Steward always said. He said Duran would never beat Tommy. He also said and Duran knew it. After the welterweight loss to Hearns, Duran would have said he did not train for the fight like he always did after a loss to great fighters.

About Tommy mixing it up? Tommy always mixed it up a little. It was his weakness, but against Duran he would always calm down and set his punches up. Duran's style of standing straight up could never take a right hand with Tommy.

What surprises me about Duran's fans and their is defense of him is the change in what the excuse is according to different fights. He was not prime or was not a real welterweight when he lost to Leonard in the rematch, Yet when they talk about Duran losing at 154 to Hearns I hear, well at welterweight he would beat Hearns. The same weight they said he was too small to fight Leonard.

Even after saying he would beat Hearns at welterweight, they will say Hearns was too big for Duran. How can a guy 5-8 beat a guy 6-1? Even though I have stated Dwight Qawi fought at lightheavy and he was 5-7 I think. And Duran fought at 154 earlier than Ray,Hearns and Benitez. You cannot have it both ways or 3 ways, and even a 4th when the excuses for Duran not training come up.

Ray didn't take Hearns best punch in 1981. He was great defensively, and Barkley in 1988 was not hit much with Tommy's right either , which is why Tommy was working the body. Duran was hit cleaner than Barkley and Leonard by Hearns. He stood straight up and was reaching in and Tommy counterpunched. I am not how 7 pounds would mean Tommy would not be able to counterpunch Duran.
He would have, and never can a guy stand straight up with Tommy. James Shuler did that and was knocked out.

 

the thing about Duran is that his punches never looked like they hurt and yet bowled most opponents over. Like an amateur friend of mine once said "can u imagine how hard Duran hits?"

 

Luis Rodgriguez :good

 

yes he did. Those right hands did hit Tommy a couple of times hard enough. Everytime Tommy was hit he backed off and regrouped and fought from the outside more.