Was Duran-Hagler even going into the 15th round on judges scorecards?

:thumbsupwell said my man

 

I don't agree. Barkley didn't hold every advantage. Experience and infighting all were favoring Duran. And Duran has good power even at 160 which again proves he was comfortable at the weight.Which is exactly what happened. Even in round one Duran landed a right hand which hurt Barkley. He could not have hurt Nunn or Kalambay in round one like that because stylistically he would not have been able to hit them. You say he should not have beat Barkley, but I am not lying when I say I knew Duran would win that fight. I heard they signed to fight in late 1988, and I thought oh man Duran is going to get a chance to win a title and beat the guy who beat Tommy. Perfect fighter to fight Duran and situation for Duran. Because the only thing Barkley has is a win over Hearns which is significant.

By the way, Duran was comfortable at 160. I remember in the 1990s he fought guys on USA Tuesday night fights and his right hand was hard and would knock many of them down. He was not this weak little fighter. That power is what kept him in fights, and that proved to me he fought well at higher weights.

And about the lightweight reign-Duran established himself, yet the rarity of Duran is that the greatest guys he fought were when he moved up. It worked out well for him since he could have excuses for the losses, yet when he won it was a big surprise he was great enough to win another title. But in no way does his lightweight reign and names there get him any better than top 30 pfp.
Best victory of the 1980s? I don't think so. Ray was not an established elite when Duran beat him. He was still inexperienced. He made a young fighter fight his fight as Ray said.
I still do not think Duran's lightweight reign is so great that a win over Ray was the icing on the cake. Not if Duran wants a 5-10 ATG ranking. If he did want that ranking, he needed wins over Leonard in the rematch, Benitez and Hearns. Then he would have easily had that, but beating those 3 guys in that fashion was not easy.

I agree, a loss to Dawson will not hinder Hopkins greatness. But even there it will show that a guy who he did not handpick will beat him, rather than fighting Pascal. To be honest also, the guys which Hopkins has fought including Trinidad and since have been much better than the guys Duran fought at lightweight. I am not talking about prime years fighting, but Tito,Wright,Jones,Tarver,Calzaghe etc. 4 of those guys are Hall of fame.

 

No.

Fair enough.

 

Mag,you do this all of the time.All of the ****ing time.Here we go yet again.Leonard was ABSOLUTELY an established elite by the time he fought Duran.When you claim he wasn't,your credibility goes right into the toilet.HE HAD ALREADY KNOCKED BENITEZ OUT BEFORE HE FOUGHT DURAN,FFS.You remember Wilfred Benitez.He's the fellow that you have insisted should be included in (your renaming)the Fab 5.So,you're either in denial or a hypocrite.And as far as your claiming that Leonard didn't "fight his fight",Leonard fought flatfooted frequently before and after Duran.IN FACT,it's the style which enabled him to KNOCK OUT TOMMY HEARNS.If you were to say-perhaps Leonard-Duran 1 may have been different had Leonard chosen to utilize his many natural advantages over Duran including his superior footspeed,the result may have been different-you would at least have more credibilty instead of continuously making excuses for Leonard against Duran.But then again,that's what you do.ALWAYS.That's just you.By the way,you say that Duran was comfortable at 160 because of the fights you saw in the 90's when he'd knock many of his opponents down.1st off,he turned 40 in 1991.2nd,and far more important,what SIGNIFICANT middleweight did Duran knock down after Barkley in the 90s?Duran fought overweight frequently throughout his career,but was a natural lightweight as he fought a plurality of his fights at 135 and under.And if he wasn't past it when he was fighting at 154 or just as comfortable fighting there as 135,just how the **** did he lose to Kirkland ****ing Laing?I just can't wait to read your "logic" on that one.

 

Had Duran been given the decision it would have been one of the great rip off''s of all time. Hagler being a bit tentative for periods played right into the fairytale. Great effort by Duran, but never close to (realistically) a winning one.

 

Roberto was a great fighter, but I have never scored that fight closer than 9-6 for Hagler. Duran certainly wasn't doing the better work. He won rounds by controlling the action and Marvin looking terrible. Rarely did he really outland and outdo Hagler with good, hard shots.

Duran whipping Barkley was, however, a wonderful upset. Guy was one helluva fighter, though its overplayed that he was a "lightweight" for these fights(He absolutely wasn't, and hadn't been for awhile), he was still smaller than these champs, outgunned, and still managed to deliver credible, skillful performances, in addition to several virtuoso wins.

Hagler was just not gonna be one of them.

 

Yeah Duran over Barkley was a wonderful event. I had it closer than most but it was a sensational effort.

 

Yes.

 

:good hopefully one day mag will see sense

 

Cheers! Surely he'll get it one day lol

 

Don't count on it,man.He repeats the same inaccuracies quite frequently.:yep

 

Class avatar!!!!!!!

 

No way was Leonard an established elite when he fought Duran. You think Duran's status is that important where boxing history should be revised? Was Meldrick Taylor a top fighter when he beat John Meekins in 1988 in his second title defense? Was Pernell elite when he lost to Ramirez i the first fight only to come back and fight more flatfooted but defensive in the rematch and win easily, which is exactly my point. Ray got better and learned the whole game and outboxed Duran easily and made him quit. The facts are there. It has happened in boxing history. Ray being a top elite guy in June of 1980 is not true. I would love to ask Ray that question and he would say he was not.

Why shouldn't Benitez be part of the fab 5? He fought Hearns and Leonard and beat Duran easily. The only thing he didn't do was fight Hagler, which almost surely he would have lost to him. But so did Duran, and Benitez gave Hearns a much tougher fight than Duran did obviously. Wilfred was not as exciting as the other 4, so that is why he is not in the group, and also the fact the other guys had more big superfights.

The fact is not Ray fighting flatfooted, it is that against Duran he was the faster guy and could outbox Duran easily and he choose to try and beat him at his own game. Why fight a master on the inside if you do not have to And even then the fight was closer than most would probably expect. In the rematch he moved and used his feet. Compare the first and second Duran/Leonard fights and see how Ray's foot movement changes just in round one. It is incredible. Duran couldn't make those moves.

Ray did not beat Hearns being flatfooted. He hurt Hearns more when Hearns got careless in round 6 and round 13 from overconfidence in round 6 and fatigue in round 13, but when Ray was coming forward Hearns was hitting him with the jab and picking him up and down to the body and head and landing some occasional right hands.

I don't have to make excuses for Leonard. The fact he could turn around and box and use his feet and fight his fight proves the first fight was not the style he should have used. It isn't like he lost the first fight closely and then fought the second fight the same way and barely edged Duran. And then Duran losing to Benitez just a little over a year later proves Duran could not deal with speed. He never fought guys like this before this time no matter what.

Duran fought many fights post 135. He had tuneups since 1978 at 154, and as some state his record before Ray was 72-1. And I know he retired at about 115 fights, so 45 fights past 135 is really miniscule? Also Duran fought more years post 135 (21) than not (13) Kirkland Laing was after the Benitez fight and obviously Duran's confidence was affected after losing to Benitez easily. He should have beaten Laing, since before Benitez he outfought Minchillo who was a decent european fighter whom Hearns and McCallum later outboxed.
What significant guy did Duran knockdown after Barkley in the 1990s? Not that significant but Pazienza who had a good chin. You will just say he was a lightweight also, but he was a solid chinned guy. Took a lot for Jones to stop him.

 

The Hagler fight was not exciting and once Marvin realized he had to pore it on he did. With Barkley, Duran fought a guy who just was not that great. Barkley's whole claim to fame is the Hearns win. I love Barkley's personality, but let's not overrate the guy.

 

This post is very poor.Mag,the problem with you is you have an agenda and can't even see(or just choose not to)your own contradictions.You write Benitez belongs in the "Fab 5".Ok,fine.I personally believe Benitez was a great fighter.But then you write that Leonard was not an established elite when he fought Duran in their 1st.But,by the time they fought,Leonard had already ko'd Benitezatsch.Then you write that,"Ray got better and learned the whole game and outboxed Duran and made him quit,"IN HIS VERY NEXT FIGHT!!!!Do you not possible fathom the contradictions there?Either A.Benitez belongs in the Fab 5,which would have made Leonard an established elite because Leonard KNOCKED HIM OUT.Or B.Benitez does not belong in the "Fab 5,"and therefore your comment that Leonard wasn't an established elite when he fought Duran wouldn't be such a contradiction on your part.If you want to put Benitez in that group because he beat a past it and past prime weight Duran even though he lost to the other 2,go right ahead.As I wrote before,I believe Benitez was a great fighter.But you know what the funniest part of your thread is?You claim Leonard wasn't an established elite when he fought Duran(what absolute nonsense btw),but he ko'd Benitez beforehand,which is something that one of the ATG punchers at welter and superwelter- Tommy Hearns-couldn't do(lol).You say you don't have to make excuses for Leonard,but that's ALL YOU DO WHEN DISCUSSING HIS PERFORMANCE IN DURAN-LEONARD 1.ALL OF THE TIME IN ALL OF THOSE THREADS.Can you possibly not see that?Can't you?And I've no idea where you came up with the "miniscule" quote concerning the amount of fights Duran had above 135.All I wrote is that Duran had a plurality of his fights at or below the 135 limit.But if you want to put words in my mouth,you're failing yet again.And so what he fought more years post 135 than not?THE GUY FOUGHT PROFESSIONALLY FOR OVER 30 ****ING YEARS!!!!That proves absolutely nothing in your arguments.How old was he when he fought Benitez-31 or 32 with over 70 fights under his belt?Funny how you're making excuses for Duran's performance in the Laing fight.I would have thought you would have done that just for your man Leonard.Funny how you're mentioning Duran knocking down Pazienza because that does not bolster your argument one bit,but if you want to believe so,go right ahead.And Duran never got a decision against Pazienza in a coupla fights,did he?But yet Duran was QUITE COMFORTABLE AT 160,wasn't heatsch?These are the reasons that no one on these boards really take your opinion on this matter seriously,and I was was foolish enough to take 10 minutes to even respond to your post.Shame on me.But next week,or the week after I will peruse over your posts when this subject comes up again and you will yet again make the excuse for Leonard and claim that Duran was a natural welter or 154 pounder or 160 or whatever,even though that's at least 12 pounds over his best,prime,natural weight.I'll read your posts soon on this matter so I can have a good chuckle again.