Roberto Duran fights the greatest fighter he ever fought [Archive]

View Full Version : Roberto Duran fights the greatest fighter he ever fought

Princemanspopa

11-13-2009, 06:31 AM

TheGreatA

11-13-2009, 07:05 AM

mrboxer

11-13-2009, 09:47 AM

1SILVA

11-13-2009, 10:26 AM

GJC

11-13-2009, 11:09 AM

TheGreatA

11-13-2009, 12:13 PM

Also Hagler and Leonard would have a thing or two to say about that.

mrboxer

11-13-2009, 12:20 PM

what would hagler and leonard have to say,i do not care what they have to say,why did they both duck pryor

mrboxer

11-13-2009, 12:20 PM

duran and cuevas are both overrated,when cuevas got hit by the right of hearns he looked like he just consumed a bottle of tequila,duran and cuevas were both swinging wildly and were trying to land haymakers against hearns,that is not how you beat hearns,to beat hearns you have to brawl with him,after a while his legs turn to rubber and when he gets whacked on the chin he does not know how to recover,:boxing:

TheGreatA

11-13-2009, 12:32 PM

what would hagler and leonard have to say,i do not care what they have to say,why did they both duck pryor

Pryor admitted he turned down half a million to fight Leonard.

Hagler had 20 pounds on Pryor. Pryor wasn't stupid enough to call out Hagler, in fact he had contemplate whether to campaign at 147 or not, he decided not to.

The Noose

11-13-2009, 12:39 PM

duran went down like a tree,he got owned,he was way out of his league,duran had no business what so ever being in the ring with hearns,duran landed only 2 punches and both were below the belt,when duran awoke from i think the most brutal kayo ever with the help of smelling salts,he was asked what happened and his response was i do not remember,no kidding he did not remember he was out like light,duran is a legend in his own mind he is not even close to the likes of leonard,hearns,hagler,benitez:boxing:

Not this **** again!

Duran is consistently ranked in the top 20 p4p of all time. He is regarded the greatest LW ever. He is a multi weight champion, beating men well beyond his optimum fighting weight class.

Hagler, Leonard, Hearns, Benitez were all great fighters and beat him well after his prime.

Amazingly, as a former Lightweight, he gave possibly the greatest middleweight champion ever, Hagler, a very tough fight, and did much better than the vast majority of fully fledged middleweights that Hagler fought.

10 years after being a LW he won the MW title.

21 years after being the LW champion, with over 100 fights, he won the NBA Super Middleweight Title at the age of 50.

The Noose

11-13-2009, 12:42 PM

Stoppage

11-13-2009, 12:43 PM

mickey malone

11-13-2009, 12:49 PM

That's a good explanation but it wasn't worth it. That guy is a troll and so is Mr. Internet Tough Guy who started the thread.
It's a bait thread.. Just ignore it

The Noose

11-13-2009, 01:05 PM

it's a bait thread.. Just ignore it

neverrrrrr!!

mrboxer

11-13-2009, 01:33 PM

Like he recovered and beat SRL in their rematch?the rematch was a draw,and leonard did not have good punching power at that higher weight:boxing:

GJC

11-13-2009, 01:59 PM

the rematch was a draw,and leonard did not have good punching power at that higher weight:boxing:

So it wasn't a higher weight for Hearns then?

The Noose

11-13-2009, 02:03 PM

the rematch was a draw,and leonard did not have good punching power at that higher weight:boxing:

U scored it a draw? lol

:alcoholic

GJC

11-13-2009, 02:13 PM

No he probably scored it a shut out for SRL lol

mrboxer

11-13-2009, 02:26 PM

no but i think leonard did enough to garner a ud:drillserg

American_Ninja

11-13-2009, 02:36 PM

I lived in Vegas and went to that fight. I also went to many of his training sessions. He looked good in training.
Duran was fighting with a hangover. He went out the night before the fight
and drank to much. That was the word going around in boxing circles.

GJC

11-13-2009, 02:47 PM

no but i think leonard did enough to garner a ud:drillserg
Probably got that shut out if he had visited the canvas a few more times eh?

The Noose

11-13-2009, 02:50 PM

Probably got that shut out if he had visited the canvas a few more times eh?

lol

karma.

Princemanspopa

11-13-2009, 03:51 PM

Not this **** again!

Duran is consistently ranked in the top 20 p4p of all time. He is regarded the greatest LW ever. He is a multi weight champion, beating men well beyond his optimum fighting weight class.

Hagler, Leonard, Hearns, Benitez were all great fighters and beat him well after his prime.

They happened to be the greatest fighters that Duran ever stepped in a ring with.He wasn't shot and washed up by the time he moved up from lightweight as his apologists will tell you.He lost to these fighters because they were simply better than him.It's debatable that Duran is the greatest LW of all time also.

Amazingly, as a former Lightweight, he gave possibly the greatest middleweight champion ever, Hagler, a very tough fight, and did much better than the vast majority of fully fledged middleweights that Hagler fought.

Duran never gave Hagler "A very tough fight".This is a myth used by Duran apologists to claim the greatness of their hero.Duran didn't fight to win,he fought to survive.Hagler dominated him when they actually did fight,giving Duran anything more than four rounds is being very generous.A one-eyed Juan Roldan gave Hagler a much tougher fight.

That's a good explanation but it wasn't worth it. That guy is a troll and so is Mr. Internet Tough Guy who started the thread.

Congratulations,you just watched your first Roberto Duran fight.

I lived in Vegas and went to that fight. I also went to many of his training sessions. He looked good in training.
Duran was fighting with a hangover. He went out the night before the fight
and drank to much. That was the word going around in boxing circles.

That was the word that was going around among Duran apologists you mean? Fortunately enough for us,footage exists of this fight and the Duran apologists can't change the fact that he got knocked out cold by a far greater fighter than he was.

Why do you have such a downer on Duran?

Are you being genuine here? Have you read some of the replys in this thread from the Duran apologists? You take all sixteen of his losses and according to Duran and his apologists,he never even lost one.Despite the fact that he shamefully quit during a huge fight,despite the fact that he got absolutely clowned by Kirkland Laing,his apologists still treat him as if he could do no wrong.

If anybody was ever more deserving of the Joppy treatment,then it was Roberto Duran.

mrboxer

11-13-2009, 03:59 PM

Probably got that shut out if he had visited the canvas a few more times eh?now you are using your head,way to go you do have a little bit of boxing in you,good response:drillserg

mrboxer

11-13-2009, 04:02 PM

They happened to be the greatest fighters that Duran ever stepped in a ring with.He wasn't shot and washed up by the time he moved up from lightweight as his apologists will tell you.He lost to these fighters because they were simply better than him.It's debatable that Duran is the greatest LW of all time also.

Duran never gave Hagler "A very tough fight".This is a myth used by Duran apologists to claim the greatness of their hero.Duran didn't fight to win,he fought to survive.Hagler dominated him when they actually did fight,giving Duran anything more than four rounds is being very generous.A one-eyed Juan Roldan gave Hagler a much tougher fight.

Congratulations,you just watched your first Roberto Duran fight.

That was the word that was going around among Duran apologists you mean? Fortunately enough for us,footage exists of this fight and the Duran apologists can't change the fact that he got knocked out cold by a far greater fighter than he was.

Are you being genuine here? Have you read some of the replys in this thread from the Duran apologists? You take all sixteen of his losses and according to Duran and his apologists,he never even lost one.Despite the fact that he shamefully quit during a huge fight,despite the fact that he got absolutely clowned by Kirkland Laing,his apologists still treat him as if he could do no wrong.

If anybody was ever more deserving of the Joppy treatment,then it was Roberto Duran.ya he did get clowned by kirkland,and he also got owned by a lot of others,the first leonard fight he should of lost i had leonard winning 11 rounds,those judges must of been watching another fight:drillserg

GJC

11-13-2009, 04:47 PM

It's debatable that Duran is the greatest LW of all time also.

Where do you have him?

Duran didn't fight to win,he fought to survive.Hagler dominated him when they actually did fight,giving Duran anything more than four rounds is being very generous.A one-eyed Juan Roldan gave Hagler a much tougher fight.

Duran let Hagler force the fight bit different from surviving. Good tatics as Hagler was better at counter punching and pretty much copied by SRL.
I certainly didn't have Duran ahead after 12 rounds as I believe the judges did but I think credit to a blown up LW being the first challenger to take Hagler the distance is warrented.
You needed to put natural middleweight between eyed and Juan.

That was the word that was going around among Duran apologists you mean? Fortunately enough for us,footage exists of this fight and the Duran apologists can't change the fact that he got knocked out cold by a far greater fighter than he was.

No he was well beat, if he prepared badly more fool him he was beaten by a far greater LMW than him.

Are you being genuine here? Have you read some of the replys in this thread from the Duran apologists? You take all sixteen of his losses and according to Duran and his apologists,he never even lost one.Despite the fact that he shamefully quit during a huge fight,despite the fact that he got absolutely clowned by Kirkland Laing,his apologists still treat him as if he could do no wrong.
If anybody was ever more deserving of the Joppy treatment,then it was Roberto Duran.
Maybe they are over compensating for your bias against him?
Well half his losses were after he was 40 so I would discount them as I would for most fighters other than the odd freak like Archie Moore or BHop.
Absolutely clowned is excessive, he lost to a good fighter who was focassed for once.
So why was Duran "deserving of the Joppy treatment" go on lets hear it, let it out.

GJC

11-13-2009, 04:49 PM

TheGreatA

11-13-2009, 05:04 PM

Hagler-Duran post-fight quotes:

If Hagler learned anything in the Duran fight, it was not to lie back and let the rounds pass by. Pat and Goody Petronelli, Hagler's handlers, learned a lot that night, too. "Who would have thought that Duran could outbox a Marvin Hagler?" Pat Petronelli asks. "We told Marvin, 'Lay back and counter-punch.' He's going to come at you. Duran took us to school."

"People think I'm going to go crazy in there, like against Leonard," Duran said before the fight. "But, no."

"I knew that Hagler was waiting for me to get inside to fight with him," Duran said afterward, "so he could get his punches in with force."

"I fought him at half-distance," Duran said. "I was waiting for him to unload so I could score on him. Whichever hand he unloaded, I was ready to counter. He didn't confuse me with anything. I was beating him without mixing it up too much."

Petronelli's foreboding deepened. "Duran waited and waited and waited for Marvin to lead," he said. "We had to change our tactics and go on the offensive, which isn't really Marvin's style." So at the end of the third, Petronelli told Hagler, "This ain't going too well. Put the pressure on him."

"He'd slip and counter, slide back and wait for me," Hagler said. "When you're trying for a knockout, it's the hardest thing to get. That's what I was after, but you have to let them come. He wasn't there. Duran is too crafty to go after for a knockout. You leave yourself open, and he takes advantage of it."

"I turned my head to be careful of his right because it's his most dangerous hand. His left is dead. The hand he most relied on was his right," Duran said.

"I wasn't getting my jab off the way I generally do," said Hagler, who was more effective when he switched from a lefty to a righty stance, which brought him two feet closer to Duran. "It seemed everybody was disappointed that I didn't knock him out. I felt that way myself. But he wasn't that vulnerable to a knockout. It was hard to hit him with a solid punch. I didn't catch him with a solid shot."

"I was a little scared because he was coming in straight up," Duran said. "I could reach him with any right, but actually I was scared to throw the right hand."

"He came to tear my head off," says Duran, "but when he saw that I could hit him hard, with strength, he got scared and became a coward. That's why he didn't take too many chances and mix it up with me. Everyone was saying he was a destroyer, but when he hit me, he didn't do anything to me. His punches absolutely did me no damage. He got scared every time he threw a jab because I could get my right in under it. That's why he held off so much."

"I'm not a fool either," Hagler would say, "going in to get hit. You don't barrel in there on a guy like Roberto Duran. Why take unnecessary punishment unless you have to? I'd been effective and was winning the fight, so it isn't like I had to go in there and take the punishment to bomb him out."

"The better man won," Duran said, after two judges had given Hagler the victory by one point, the other by two.

Princemanspopa

11-13-2009, 05:26 PM

Duran let Hagler force the fight bit different from surviving. Good tatics as Hagler was better at counter punching and pretty much copied by SRL.
I certainly didn't have Duran ahead after 12 rounds as I believe the judges did but I think credit to a blown up LW being the first challenger to take Hagler the distance is warrented.

Ray Leonard pretty much used the same tactics that Marcos Geraldo used,only on a more consistent basis.Duran never really put himself in a position to engage Hagler as he was afraid of doing so.

Maybe they are over compensating for your bias against him?
Well half his losses were after he was 40 so I would discount them as I would for most fighters other than the odd freak like Archie Moore or BHop.
Absolutely clowned is excessive, he lost to a good fighter who was focassed for once.
So why was Duran "deserving of the Joppy treatment" go on lets hear it, let it out.

My or anybody else's supposed bias against Duran is born out of frustration with his apologists.There are very few boxing fans who hold the same opinion of Duran that I do,he doesn't have fans,he has apologists.They like Duran himself,has two excuses for every loss that he ever suffered.Kirkland Laing won a very clear decision over Duran despite one judge scoring the fight for Duran.

Duran lost Leonard at age 29,he lost to Benitez at age 30,he lost to Laing at age 31,he lost to Hagler at age 32 and he was destroyed by Thomas Hearns just a day before his 33rd birthday.

GJC

11-13-2009, 08:47 PM

Tommy Loughran lost to Primo Carnera when he was 32 doesn't mean he wasn't a great light heavy or a great fighter.
You avoided the question, as a fair minded boxing fan i'll ask you again where do you rate Duran at Lightweight?

Obama

11-13-2009, 09:28 PM

TheGreatA

11-13-2009, 10:17 PM

I believe that fight is a documented fix. Not speculation, flat out confirmed.

Carnera-Loughran was a fix? Never heard of that. Certainly doesn't seem that way on film.

Obama

11-13-2009, 10:25 PM

Carnera-Loughran was a fix? Never heard of that. Certainly doesn't seem that way on film.

I'm trying to remember where I heard it from. But I'm 99% sure that's right.

And fixes aren't supposed to look like fixes. Otherwise people wouldn't get away with it.

TheGreatA

11-13-2009, 10:40 PM

I'm trying to remember where I heard it from. But I'm 99% sure that's right.

And fixes aren't supposed to look like fixes. Otherwise people wouldn't get away with it.

But there's nothing odd at all about the Loughran-Carnera fight for a supposed fix, and I've never ever heard it being called a fix before until now.

Loughran got off to a quick start and stunned the heavier Carnera several times with quick punches although not actually hurting him since Loughran was a light puncher. Carnera then put on the pressure and rough-housed Loughran with his strength and size, pummeling him in the corners with Loughran attempting to brawl back, unsuccessfully.

It also didn't help Loughran that the near 100 lb bigger Carnera stepped on his foot, injuring it. Loughran relied on his footwork.

From Time Magazine:

Carnera v. Loughran

In the first round, Primo Camera lumbered out of his corner and shuffled his huge feet while Tommy Loughran dabbed his lantern jaw with a left jab. In the second and third rounds the champion tried to rush the challenger against the ropes but failed; Loughran, fast on his feet, landed one solid right hand punch. The fourth round was Loughran's, but by now Camera had learned how to crowd his opponent into the corners. In the fifth, he caught Loughran against the ropes and began to smash his face with wide clublike blows. A blonde woman near the ringside let out a piercing scream. Alarmed, Camera turned his head to see what was the matter. When he looked back, Loughran had danced out of reach.

To the crowd of 10,000, smallest in 43 years for a heavyweight championship fight, in the Miami arena last week, this was an amazing beginning. Weeks of intensive sneers in the Press had led them to believe that the bout between a 270-lb. champion from Italy and a challenger who was five years older and 86 Ib. lighter was as unfair as it sounded. Now, on a windy evening with rain pattering on rows and rows of empty $20 seats, they became aware that the spectacle under the warm cone of light at the centre of the Madison Square Garden stadium was an exciting contest between a clever, courageous boxer and a nervous, clumsy monster, embarrassed by his own size and the hostility of the crowd. When Loughran ended the fifth round with a smashing right to Camera's chin it looked for a moment as if the little man might win after all.

After the fifth round. Camera did better. Loughran's tactics of running in and clinching made it impossible to land a knockout punch but Camera wrestled away from the challenger as best he could. He rushed out of his corner in the eighth and caught Loughran against the ropes for a second. In the tenth, he made the mistake of courteously touching gloves, as if it were the last round. At the end of the 14th, Loughran was dazed enough to start for the wrong corner of the ring. During the next round, Loughran managed to cling groggily to his huge adversary until the bell ended the fight. Three judges gave Camera a unanimous decision.

To Madison Square Garden, which lost $20,000, last week's was by no means the most costly heavyweight championship fight on record. That distinction still belongs to the Tunney v. Heeney bout of 1928 on which $200,000 was dropped. Camera's failure to knock out an opponent who has only been knocked out twice in 148 fights caused most sportswriters to deride him for his victory last week. Nothing he has done since he landed in the U. S. in 1929-, an illiterate monster with a French manager, has won him any praise or popularity. After last week's bout, Challenger Loughran, lauded as the finest sportsman among U. S. prizefighters, spoke of "rabbit punches and backhand blows," complained that the champion should have been disqualified for stepping on his foot. Monster Camera was more polite: "He [Loughran] was fighting a great fight. ... I should have knocked him out but it would have been shameful to treat such a courageous opponent in such fashion. . . ."

Obama

11-13-2009, 10:45 PM

It was either in a documentary or from Henry. One or the other.

American_Ninja

11-13-2009, 11:35 PM

That was the word that was going around among Duran apologists you mean? Fortunately enough for us,footage exists of this fight and the Duran apologists can't change the fact that he got knocked out cold by a far greater fighter than he was.

Im not a Hearns hater, but Tommy wasn't by any means a great fighter.
Good, not great.

JAB5239

11-14-2009, 03:54 AM

ya he did get clowned by kirkland,and he also got owned by a lot of others,the first leonard fight he should of lost i had leonard winning 11 rounds,those judges must of been watching another fight:drillserg

We already know you won't post your imaginary top 100 list, but I like to know your criteria for judging a fight. 11 out of 15 for Leonard, are you serious?

JAB5239

11-14-2009, 04:06 AM

I believe that fight is a documented fix. Not speculation, flat out confirmed.

Carnera-Loughran was a fix? Never heard of that. Certainly doesn't seem that way on film.

I'm trying to remember where I heard it from. But I'm 99% sure that's right.

And fixes aren't supposed to look like fixes. Otherwise people wouldn't get away with it.

But there's nothing odd at all about the Loughran-Carnera fight for a supposed fix, and I've never ever heard it being called a fix before until now.

Loughran got off to a quick start and stunned the heavier Carnera several times with quick punches although not actually hurting him since Loughran was a light puncher. Carnera then put on the pressure and rough-housed Loughran with his strength and size, pummeling him in the corners with Loughran attempting to brawl back, unsuccessfully.

It also didn't help Loughran that the near 100 lb bigger Carnera stepped on his foot, injuring it. Loughran relied on his footwork.

From Time Magazine:

Carnera v. Loughran

In the first round, Primo Camera lumbered out of his corner and shuffled his huge feet while Tommy Loughran dabbed his lantern jaw with a left jab. In the second and third rounds the champion tried to rush the challenger against the ropes but failed; Loughran, fast on his feet, landed one solid right hand punch. The fourth round was Loughran's, but by now Camera had learned how to crowd his opponent into the corners. In the fifth, he caught Loughran against the ropes and began to smash his face with wide clublike blows. A blonde woman near the ringside let out a piercing scream. Alarmed, Camera turned his head to see what was the matter. When he looked back, Loughran had danced out of reach.

To the crowd of 10,000, smallest in 43 years for a heavyweight championship fight, in the Miami arena last week, this was an amazing beginning. Weeks of intensive sneers in the Press had led them to believe that the bout between a 270-lb. champion from Italy and a challenger who was five years older and 86 Ib. lighter was as unfair as it sounded. Now, on a windy evening with rain pattering on rows and rows of empty $20 seats, they became aware that the spectacle under the warm cone of light at the centre of the Madison Square Garden stadium was an exciting contest between a clever, courageous boxer and a nervous, clumsy monster, embarrassed by his own size and the hostility of the crowd. When Loughran ended the fifth round with a smashing right to Camera's chin it looked for a moment as if the little man might win after all.

After the fifth round. Camera did better. Loughran's tactics of running in and clinching made it impossible to land a knockout punch but Camera wrestled away from the challenger as best he could. He rushed out of his corner in the eighth and caught Loughran against the ropes for a second. In the tenth, he made the mistake of courteously touching gloves, as if it were the last round. At the end of the 14th, Loughran was dazed enough to start for the wrong corner of the ring. During the next round, Loughran managed to cling groggily to his huge adversary until the bell ended the fight. Three judges gave Camera a unanimous decision.

To Madison Square Garden, which lost $20,000, last week's was by no means the most costly heavyweight championship fight on record. That distinction still belongs to the Tunney v. Heeney bout of 1928 on which $200,000 was dropped. Camera's failure to knock out an opponent who has only been knocked out twice in 148 fights caused most sportswriters to deride him for his victory last week. Nothing he has done since he landed in the U. S. in 1929-, an illiterate monster with a French manager, has won him any praise or popularity. After last week's bout, Challenger Loughran, lauded as the finest sportsman among U. S. prizefighters, spoke of "rabbit punches and backhand blows," complained that the champion should have been disqualified for stepping on his foot. Monster Camera was more polite: "He [Loughran] was fighting a great fight. ... I should have knocked him out but it would have been shameful to treat such a courageous opponent in such fashion. . . ."

I've just gone thru several newspaper articles from the day and nothing indicates a fix in my opinion. Carnerra's huge size advantage was frowned upon, but the fight seems to be on the up and up. Haven't seen the fight myself so its difficult to give a first hand opinion.

Princemanspopa

11-14-2009, 05:28 AM

Just ignore dunce,he often makes accusations without any proof to back up his claims.His sources tend to be internet boxing historians.

Im not a Hearns hater, but Tommy wasn't by any means a great fighter.
Good, not great.

You're certainly an odd Duran apologist aren't you? How bad does that make Duran look,that he got dispatched so easily inside of two rounds by nothing more than a good fighter?

Thomas Hearns made a career out of beating good fighters,his success isn't limited to the fab four like Leonard and Hagler are,and he didn't disgrace himself during that era like Duran did either.

No fighter who was simply just "Good" could have dispatched away the likes of Duran,Cuevas,Roldan,Andries,Schuler as easily as Hearns did.No fighter who was simply just "Good" could have outboxed Wilfred Benitez and a prime Virgil Hill while Hearns at this stage was a good three to four years past his prime.

BennyST

11-14-2009, 06:28 AM

ya he did get clowned by kirkland,and he also got owned by a lot of others,the first leonard fight he should of lost i had leonard winning 11 rounds,those judges must of been watching another fight:drillserg

:lol1::lol1:

It gets more obvious every day that you do nothing more than try to get arguments started here. Does it make you feel better?

BennyST

11-14-2009, 06:43 AM

Im not a Hearns hater, but Tommy wasn't by any means a great fighter.
Good, not great.

Out of curiosity, if Tommy Hearns isn't great, then no fighter in the sports history could be classified as great. Why do you think he isn't?

Who is great if Hearns isn't? What is your classification for great?

Just our of curiosity, what more could Hearns have done to be considered great? Fighting from WW to CW and winning titles at 147, 154, 160, 168, 175 and a series of minor titles at CW too! He was the first to win four titles, beat many great HOF'ers including Benitez, Duran, Cuevas, Leonard (despite the draw, Hearns beat him as convincingly as anyone ever did, apart from Camacho at 40 or whatever), Virgil Hill and many other very good champions/fighters like Dennis Andries, Michael Olajide, James Kinchen, Juan Roldan, Doug De Witt, Hutchings, Shuler, Sutherland etc etc etc.

Tommy Hearns was a bona fide great and I'm surprised you wouldn't consider him as such. :thinking:

bojangles1987

11-14-2009, 07:56 AM

That KO always gives me chills. Hearns completely obliterated him. As great as Duran was, there was absolutely no way he could beat Thomas Hearns, at any point at any weight.

TheGreatA

11-14-2009, 08:25 AM

Hagler★

11-14-2009, 09:22 AM

Obama

11-14-2009, 09:45 AM

Just ignore dunce,he often makes accusations without any proof to back up his claims.His sources tend to be internet boxing historians.

Brief description of what Henry does:

Newspaper sports writers from all over the country have called his [Henry Hascup's] home for sport information. He is currently the President and Historian, since the mid-1980's, of the New Jersey Boxing Hall of Fame as well as the New Jersey Diamond Gloves. He is also the Historian of many other sporting organizations throughout the area, including Ring #25 & Ring #34 and is on the Board of Directors of Ring #8 out of New York. He also has been asked to MC many sporting functions thoughout the local area and has ring announced boxing shows on ESPN, Madison Square Garden Channel, Atlantic City, Westchester County Center in White Plains, Monticello Raceway, Hanover Marriott in Whippany, Iona College, Huntington Townhouse, etc.

More here:
http://www.answerbag.com/profile/?id=55972

-----------

But anyways, it wasn't him who told me. I'm remembering now, it was a documentary that claimed Loughran admitted to throwing the fight later in life. I just don't remember the name of the documentary. I've seen hundreds...tends to happen. Maybe the info in the documentary was wrong. Either way, it's just what I remember. And I have a pretty good memory.

mrboxer

11-14-2009, 09:52 AM

moron
you make it sound so easy :nonono:what are you talking about,you have about ten different names on this site and not one of them has ever had a good boxing response,,so why dont you read posts and try to understand them before you make rude comments that have nothing to do with boxing:poke:

GJC

11-14-2009, 10:23 AM

Just ignore dunce,he often makes accusations without any proof to back up his claims.His sources tend to be internet boxing historians.

You're certainly an odd Duran apologist aren't you? How bad does that make Duran look,that he got dispatched so easily inside of two rounds by nothing more than a good fighter?

Thomas Hearns made a career out of beating good fighters,his success isn't limited to the fab four like Leonard and Hagler are,and he didn't disgrace himself during that era like Duran did either.

No fighter who was simply just "Good" could have dispatched away the likes of Duran,Cuevas,Roldan,Andries,Schuler as easily as Hearns did.No fighter who was simply just "Good" could have outboxed Wilfred Benitez and a prime Virgil Hill while Hearns at this stage was a good three to four years past his prime.
Duran at lightweight?

BennyST

11-15-2009, 09:05 AM

Hearns was great. He pretty much cleaned out the 147-175 divisions of their contenders. At 147 he was a terror who was KO'ing former title holders and top contenders as if they were nothing, including the feared Pipino Cuevas, at 154 he beat two great, yes great fighters in Duran and Benitez as well as a couple of title holders. He went up to 160, again KO'd several top fighters there in impressive fashion, fought at 168 and held a belt, fought at 175 and beat two of the best light heavyweights of the era in Virgil Hill and Dennis Andries.

However I'd like people to think how Thomas Hearns would have done, let's say that at 168 while being 33 years of age against a naturally 168 pound, 25 year old Roberto Duran. I don't think it would go too well for him, see the Hagler or Barkley fights for example. That's basically the equivalent of their actual fight with Duran holding the advantage.

Sadly though, only a few people think this way about fighters. Being half a foot taller, having a foot of extra reach as well as being in your prime at your best weight against an old dude way north of his doesn't matter GreatA. Duran was just a fat old piece of **** who couldn't hold a candle to Hearns or Money Mai! PPV's *****! Just check out their PPV numbers to see who is better! :lol1:

He did get blizzed. Brutally. One of the most brutal KO's you are likely to see along with many other Hearns KO's. He was vicious. VICIOUS!

It's a very interesting sort of timeline/cross-section (whatever you want to call it) though as Hearns was a monster before losing to Leonard. He lost some of his hype after that as Duran had beaten Leonard and Leonard had knocked out Benitez whereas Hearns didn't look as spectacular in his win despite putting him down twice (or was it once?).

After this Duran had gotten much praise for doing so well against Hagler, as he was expected to get hammered like he did against Hearns. Having beaten Leonard, and gone the distance with Hagler in a close fight and being still on top from the win over Moore, Hearns needed this win to get back to the top by being the only man to convincingly beat Duran. Did he ever!

Only man to ever knock out Duran, unless you want to count Joppy:dunno:. This brought him back to the top! The funny thing is he would go on to get brutalised by Hagler, then get knocked out by Barkley who would then get beaten by a 40 year old Duran, while Hearns would then beat the **** out of Leonard who had shut Duran out in their third fight while also having beaten Hagler earlier! Incredible.

Amazing timeline and boxing era when you think about it! Never be anything like it again.

GJC

11-15-2009, 10:39 AM

After this Duran had gotten much praise for doing so well against Hagler, as he was expected to get hammered like he did against Hearns.

Benny the Hagler fight was before the Hearns fight for Duran, probably just what Duran needed going up and down weights.

Only man to ever knock out Duran, unless you want to count Joppy:dunno:. This brought him back to the top! The funny thing is he would go on to get brutalised by Hagler, then get knocked out by Barkley who would then get beaten by a 40 year old Duran, while Hearns would then beat the **** out of Leonard who had shut Duran out in their third fight while also having beaten Hagler earlier! Incredible.

Amazing timeline and boxing era when you think about it! Never be anything like it again.

If any series of fights proves that triangle theories don't work its this lot.

I've always thought that when you have atg against atg you'll be lucky if one it at 98% against one being 95%. I believe that every fighter is probably only ever 100% in a couple of fights in their career and probably have a peak of around 2 years. They might still be damn good after that 2 years and still dominating the division but they are not as good as they were

BennyST

11-16-2009, 04:14 AM

Benny the Hagler fight was before the Hearns fight for Duran, probably just what Duran needed going up and down weights.

If any series of fights proves that triangle theories don't work its this lot.

I've always thought that when you have atg against atg you'll be lucky if one it at 98% against one being 95%. I believe that every fighter is probably only ever 100% in a couple of fights in their career and probably have a peak of around 2 years. They might still be damn good after that 2 years and still dominating the division but they are not as good as they were

Yeah, I know. I didn't mean it that way. Maybe the way I wrote it didn't sound right. I meant Duran was meant to get hammered at that time the same way he would later on against Hearns. I just didn't word it right.

But, because he didn't get blasted out that made Hearns having to beat him convincingly all the more important. By being the only guy to blast him out, he would then regain the same shine he had before losing the fight to Leonard. He exceeded everyone's expectations.

Yeah, having two prime ATG's fight is a very rare thing with both of them at their peak. Out of that Fab Four series, you could probably only say that the first Leonard/Duran fight, and the first Hearns/Leonard fight were when they were both at or at least close to their peak form.

I would also say the Leonard/Benitez fight was when both were at their peak years, although with all the rumours of Benitez' training for that fight, it's hard to say one way or the other. Either way, they were both fighting their best around that time and had some of their best wins.

GJC

11-16-2009, 04:02 PM

Yeah, I know. I didn't mean it that way. Maybe the way I wrote it didn't sound right. I meant Duran was meant to get hammered at that time the same way he would later on against Hearns. I just didn't word it right.

But, because he didn't get blasted out that made Hearns having to beat him convincingly all the more important. By being the only guy to blast him out, he would then regain the same shine he had before losing the fight to Leonard. He exceeded everyone's expectations.

Yeah, having two prime ATG's fight is a very rare thing with both of them at their peak. Out of that Fab Four series, you could probably only say that the first Leonard/Duran fight, and the first Hearns/Leonard fight were when they were both at or at least close to their peak form.

I would also say the Leonard/Benitez fight was when both were at their peak years, although with all the rumours of Benitez' training for that fight, it's hard to say one way or the other. Either way, they were both fighting their best around that time and had some of their best wins.
Probably my fading eyes and becoming a grammer nazi in my declining years :)
I was actually pleased to read it as I am always getting fights the wrong way round, god bless boxingrec (when it is right!)