What really went wrong when Duran met Hearns

Probably not, but it sure didn't look like Cuevas could either. We'll never know for a fact, but even if Duran had managed to get up, that one was clearly over.

 

Several factors congealed to the detriment of Duran.

1. Hearns' severe reach & height advantages, exacerbated by demon speed.

2. Hearns was at or near peak and at what I believe was his perfect weight -whereas he was relatively weakened at WW, he looked strong at 154, and still towered above most opponents. (Particularly overfed LWs)

3. Duran was 6 years past his prime and 20 pounds past his best weight.

4. Duran was not nearly as well trained and ready for Hearns as he was for Hagler 8 months earlier.*

* This is not an excuse (Sal). I for one am weary of posters who are not discerning between excuses and reasons, and dismiss real differences in performances as fans' or fighters' "excuses". The New Orleans' stomach cramps excuse was exactly that -an excuse. Duran's not training properly for Hearns was OBVIOUS in his body as much as in that performance. Those are more or less facts and partly explain that demolition. Duran did not get up for this fight like he did against Hagler. He was uninspired and lacked that old fire that burned out after Leonard I when he reached the mountaintop. He only reclaimed the inspiration he needed to be at his best a handful of times after 1980. But before we overstate his "inconsistency", let's remember context and think about how many fights Leonard or Whitaker had in toto, and then take a look at Duran's record 20 years before he retired.

The Hearns' debacle is not an excuse for his character flaws -it is a demonstration of those character flaws. Duran was a damn fool for not training harder than he did against both Leonard and Hagler because Hearns presented something far more dangerous than both of them considering his height, speed, and style.

Duran stupidly felt as though he was taking a step backwards not only in weight (going from 160 to 154) but in class (because Hearns had lost to a man Duran had already beaten).

PS/Duran did not give up. He was not the quitter that New Orleans convinced everyone he was. He was getting soundly beaten and hurt from the first minute and went out on his shield.

PSS/I have Montreal Duran beating WW Hearns. But at 154? Nope.

 

............Sorry, but I see his unwillingness to get into the proper frame of mind as an excuse. He had control over that situation. He chose not to work as hard.

 

An excuse to what? Did Duran know he had no chance and so just came in soft so that he could excuse it?

Perhaps I am confusing "excuse" with "convenient excuse". Some out here assert that it was as if Duran did train hard and was ready for war, and Hearns destroyed him anyway. I don't buy that.

 

He looked fine to me (most of the "out of shape" talk came after the fight, just like Leonard vs Duran II). But regardless of whether he was focused and well prepared or not, it wouldn't have mattered a thing. Just like it didn't matter that Frazier was out of shape against Foreman. That version of Hearns destroys any version of Duran.

 

........I guess only Duran knows the answer to you first question.

It seems to me that we differ as to whether reasons and excuses are exclusive. As far as I'm concerned, they can be both.

With Duran, it was never about what the other guy did; it was always what was wrong with him.

 

You are right there.

I honestly think that if Hearns had gone to heavyweight his power would still have got his opponents atention.

 

Maybe, but Hearns' own attention span* isn't long enough.


*from the opening bell untill the first powershot he takes

 

Duran uses his reflexes and natural ability to relax in the ring to deflect and dodge punches. Hearns simply had too much handspeed, reach, and power for Duran to make use of that part of his skillset.

 

Duran got tagged.

 

Don't get me wrong. I put Duran squarely in the top 5 all-time ******* list. He's higher on that list than he is p4p -which is going some.

 

Everything about Duran's performance was bad. Had he faced Hearns' exactly one year earlier, I submit that he would have lasted longer -but still lost and probably by KO. At WW... another story although I've waffled. Where are you on them at 147?

 

Right on. Hearns was up against a bigger monster named Hagler.

 

..........One thing I could never take from him is his standing as an all-time great. No one could seriously argue that.

 

Getting KTFO should not be held against Duran's ATG status.
All excuses aside Roberto just got what he did to 70 opponents.

It happen's. Hearns just landed first. "Boom" K.O.