Roberto Duran fights the greatest fighter he ever fought

[BennyST]

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.

[bojangles1987]

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]

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.

[Hagler★]

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,

moron
you make it sound so easy

[Obama]

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]

moron
you make it sound so easy

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

[GJC]

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]

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!

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. 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]

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. 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]

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.