Vintage 147 Montreal Duran vs. PBF. Who and how?

Think I had it 145-141 Duran the last time. Probably my favorite Welterweight fight ever.

I rate Leonard particularly high - higher than most - clearly one of the greatest wins (and performances) of all-time.

 

Ray was not the fighter in June 1980 that he was in Sept 1981 when he fought Hearns or for that matter Duran in Nov. 1980. And that was thanks to Duran teaching him to not lose his fight game if someone insults him outside the ring. The fact is Duran lost to Benitez and Hearns and Leonard and Hagler. I think he is great, but like I always said overrated in many ways-especially when dealing with a fast technical fighter who was a great himself. He could not deal with speed. The fact Ray outclassed him so much in the rematch proves a lot. Duran performance against Ray was smart. He knew how to get to Ray and it worked. Ray post June of 1980 beats Duran everytime out. As a matter of fact they were 2 of Ray's easier fights.

Duran was given so many fights to redeem himself after he lost to Ray in Nov. of 1980, and he lost to Hearns,Hagler,Benitez and Leonard again. One more win against any of these guys would have proven something. More than just saying he beat one real ATG in his life, who was still inexperienced when he fought him, but beat him easily the next two times he fought him. And yes I think 1989 matters. Ray was older also and slower and Ray still outboxed him easily.

 

You persist with this delusion that Leonard was GREEN which is frankly pathetic & it's easy for you just to quote stats which has always been the chalatans escape route.

Name me another former lightweight champ in his 30's other than hammerin hank that dared too face the trial of ordeal by combating such larger & weight dominant foes! Your standards of venting bile are slipping as you've ommited in your haste to say Duran never knocked out an ATG or he never knocked Leonard out so obviously you've missed a date with yer med's

You should adopt a policy of true honesty & confirm too all on here what you told me a while
back...........

YER DAD'S A DURAN FAN

 

I really think duran would take the first but any subsequent rematches I see going to floyd.

There isn't an active fighter today from 135-154 that would be a favourite over floyd.

He'd be a favourite over most in history. Whether he got the victories remains to be seen but if he defeats canelo, pac and martinez before calling it a day, I would put him above duran atg.

Floyd's opposition over the last 5 years is really high quality.

Bald was number 1
Hatton was number 1
Oscar was top 5
Marquez was number 1
Mosley was number 1
Ortiz was number 2
Cotto was number 1.

The only man you could knock realistically on that list is marquez, but then he went on to fight pac on even terms which in hindsight removes any and all criticism.

I know people love to hate floyd but we're in the era of a true great and he gets really undersold on these boards.

 

P.s. Any and all criticisms of duran based on 89 are utter bull****.

 

Surprising thread...almost to a man I thought most posters would without battling an eyelid pick Duran.
The fact that it's not so is a welcome change.

My gut feel says Duran wins...very diffcult to pick against the force of nature that was Montreal Duran, but Mayweather is absolutely good enough to make this a worthy thread.

 

I think Mayweather is a great fighter, albeit the most massive **** I can recall in the sport. I give him his due. But there are levels of greatness and Duran is on a higher level. He would completely smother Mayweather. He would not be mesemerized by Floyd's head if he couldn't find it. He would hit floyd to the body, the arms, the hips, and yes, the balls. He would mug Mayweather. Duran's closing speed was second to none.
Hoya and Cotto showed the recipe for beating Mayweather. Oscar fought a good fight but I believe he was not willing to go out on his shield and take the necessary risks for 12 rounds. Cotto has all the heart in the world but not the necessary skillset to finish the job. Duran is the perfect man to execute the gameplan against Mayweather.
Mayweather is a great fighter, no doubt. And I think it's reasonable to compare him to any great at 130 or 135, but he's not beating Duran, Hearns, or Leonard at 147. No way.

 

At 147lbs Duran beats Mayweather more decisively than Leonard or Hearns.

 

you know how I always feel about this subject. When he fought Ray the first time he just turned 29 and fought at 154 as early as 1978. This was not a little Duran moving up to fight the huge Ray Leonard, who was in his second title defense of his first title.

I can say this, Duran's buddy Hearns was 32 (same age as when Duran fought Hearns) and he beat 26 year old Virgil Hill who had 10 title defenses and was undefeated.

People are saying Duran would walk right through Floyd, my point is when a elite guys used speed against him Benitez and Leonard and Hearns, Duran lost. All of a sudden Duran would beat up Floyd, another fast elite. I just don't see how that works. Duran is greater than Floyd, but h2h he loses a 12 round decision.

 

Hearns would beat him the most decisive. I can see the Mayweather fight in my head with Hearns. Tommy would come out and jab and Floyd would be hard to hit with the right hand early. Tommy would not be reckless because he knows Floyd has speed to counter. he would jab and occassionally throw the right to the body when Floyd goes to the ropes, and eventually the jab would start to swell up Floyd and get him distracted and by round 5 Tommy right would be getting close. By round 9 he would stop him. Wouldn't be a 2 or 3 round knockout. floyd is good defensively and a good counterpuncher. Leonard would beat him the next decisively. just stronger and winning rounds, but it would be close. Still UD Ray. And Duran would lose a 12 round decision where Floyd would have to move and keep Duran off balanced and missing.

 

you know why I mention 1989? Duran fans say Duran beat Ray because he outfought him, and somehow he didn't train in the second fight, and lost the third (similar to how he lost 2) becaues he was old. As though Ray did not older. As a matter of fact, by 1989 Ray had diminished more than Duran from his prime. Yet still Ray's style beat Duran every round. All Duran did in that fight was cut up Ray. So the 1989 fight was significant. And it was Ray's last win.

 

He won the first because he was the better man on the night. He lost the second because leonard was the better man on the night.

The rubber means nothing at all. It means as much h2h as the hopkins v jones rematch did. The duran from 89 is so far removed from the 75 duran, it isn't even funny.

 

Bernard is a rare fighter who didn't diminish much and Roy did after being stopped badly and beaten up. Roberto and Ray were not. Hearns knocked out Duran and beat up Ray, but they still were not worn out fighters. And fact is Ray and Roberto were both champions in 1989. And Ray still outclassed him. I have magazines and videos from that time where people took this fight very seriously, only in retrospect do people now say Duran was washed up in 1989.At the time Ray looked bad against Hearns in the rematch and Duran looked good with Barkley. So Duran was given a shot to win. Then Ray outboxed him again.

 

I'll make it as simple as possible.

70's lw can not be criticised for an 89 smw fight.

 

Or maybe it tells us Pac and Marquez aren't up to that much around 147?.

I think that's a so-so list of old blown up or just okay names myself,at least if you're talking in terms of all-time records and such and not just as a nice bunch to have on your record for a hyped up and coming Welter prospect or something(ie ...the kind of fighters Leonard and Hearns were fighting 1-3 years into their career).IN that context it's quite good.

Not a single very good prime Welterweight among the bunch, with Cotto and old arse Oscar coming closest probably.Both solid fighters still when Floyd fought them, the rest don't do it for me.Hatton was a worthy scalp too considering Floyd isn't any bigger, but Ricky had already proved to be average and ill-suited at Welter so how much we can use him as "really high quality" opposition i'm not sure.

Might as well throw Gatti in as well if you're going to go by numerical ratings, he was a "champ" after all.:yep

Personally as Welter, i'd rather get a look at Floyd at some fighters like Cokes, Palomino, ernie Lopez, Crisanto Espana, Quartey etc before i want to see him fight Duran\Hearns etc

I'm willing to se a Duran vs Mayweather debate at 135 because of Floyd's ability and good size at\near the weight even though he didn't do much there, but 147? This is maybe the worst half decade ever and not a single fighter has done something to make me interested in them being pitched into those kind of fights.Hell , sometimes i wonder if Duran himself should be put in with the all-time Welters and he's got 3 or 4 performances of a massively superior quality to any recent Welterweights.