The Duran of the Hagler & Barkley fights: how good a middleweight was he?

here we go again with this duran bull****. this guy was not a great middleweight he wasn't even a good one:deal why are you people comparing him to the great middleweights of all-time when duran did nothing at the weight.

duran's record at 160:

Marvin Hagler 57-2-2 UD Loss

Manuel Zambrano 1-3 ko-2

Jorge Suero 0-0 ko-2

Robbie Sims 26-4 lost SD

Victor Claudio 10-4 won UD

Juan Carlos Gimenez Ferreyra 27-3-2 won UD

Ricky Stackhouse 18-5-1 won UD

Paul Thorne 9-1-1 won RTD 6th

Jeff Lanas 16-3 won SD

Iran Barkley 25-4 won SD

Ray Leonard 35-1-1 Lost UD

Pat Lawlor 14-1 lost TKO 6th

Tony Biglen 12-4 won UD

Ken Hulsey 14-7 won KO 2

Hector Camacho 58-3-1 Lost UD

William Joppy 25-1-1 Lost TKO 3



he was 11-5 and 1-4 in championship fights at 160

he fought during the time mcclellan, benn, toney, nunn, and roy jones jr. I didn't hear a peep from duran during that time period but he fought for another ten years after he beat barkely.

I mean there is no need to speculate duran would have gotten murdered by nunn, mcclellan, jones, or toney any decent middleweight would have handled duran as evidenced by his record.

great lightweight but that is as far as it goes:nono

 

Duran had a remarkable way of turning back the clock on a breath-taking occasion, but the fighter that anyone could speak about in generic terms disappeared entirely back in the 70's. You can be sure the people in this thread you disagree with wouldn't be betting on the Duran that spent more time eating and fornicating than training. That's not the guy they're talking about.

 

Exactly. Only a motivated and at-his-best Middleweight Duran would be a serious fight against many of the best that have been listed. If he's not on his best night, the naturally bigger fighters just chew him up and there's no need to discuss it.

 

and that beggars the question why they act the way they do. duran stopped being a serious force after he left lightweight, victories over leoanrd, moore and barkley were good victories but what he did after tells more about his greatness then winning one time and then doing nothing at that weight.

definitely an atg at 135 but at 147, 154, and 160 I think not

 

Fair enough.

He showed brilliance at every class though.

 

i agree we can't take away from the fact he was a class act. We have to respect him for going up in weight and having the balls to take on natural MWs. Who would do that in these current times?

I really stand by my decision that duran in hs prime vs bhop, a UD/SD to duran. but hey we can argue this and i am easy either way, i just think that as people havn't seen him fight in the modern times its easy to pick a current fighter we have seen on tv in recent times.

there is only one roberto duran, :good

 

so based off losing to hagler and winning a close fight with barkley you think that warrants h2h or even p4p discussionatsch

the answer is no he would not have stood a chance against any top ten middleweight. and hearns and barkely are not top ten at 160:deal

duran shouldn't be mentioned at middleweight in any type of h2h or p4p sense. he did nothing at the weight,

you're better off sticking to lightweight where he actually did something:deal

 

Hagler = one of the greatest middleweights ever...Roberto pushed him as hard as anyone had before and took many rounds off him.

Barkley = a very exciting and physically impressive titlist who was coming off a win over Hearns.

Those two performances alone prove that Duran at his best was still excellent even at middleweight..Does he beat anyone in the tier? No...Could he be a titlist in today's division? Hell yes..Id pick that Duran over any champion or world ranked fighter at middleweight right now.

There are plenty of 2nd tier champions and challengers at middleweight over the years that are worthy opponants in a fantasy matchup discussion involving Duran...Some would beat him, many I think he could beat.