We replace the 33 year old Duran with the 27 year-old version against the Hitman at 154 lbs. (Yes, that 27 year old version had a 154 lb. fight)
It'd surely last longer and be a bit more competitive but Duran can't beat Hearns at 154, IMO. Anymore than Pep could beat Pryor at 140, Jofre could beat Arguello at 130, Monzon could beat Holyfield at 190. Etc. The Duran who fought Leonard in Montreal vs the Hearns that fought Leonard at 147 might well be different since Hearns wasn't quite as developed or overwhelming strong at the weight.
Hmm, interesting, I didn't realise that Obendo fight was a 154 pound bout. I think pretty much the same result as Obendo to be honest, so Duran KO 2.
How many times has this fight been discussed over the years? Hearns ended all speculation as emphatically as he could've. Duran never bests Hearns. Duran supporters need to be content with the fact Duran was the greater fighter (& he was). He'd never get near Hearns in a fight, though.
Hearns wins 10 out of 10 at any weight, any age, whatever. BUT if I had a gun to my head and was forced to pick any former lightweight champ that existed in era of same-day weigh-ins against Hearns, it would unquestionably be the Duran from Montreal.
And as you and I both know, that's the only real way to compare them head to head since p4p fights don't exist. Another approach could be who is the more difficult to defeat in his weight class (correct answer Hearns) who achieved more (Duran), who did better against great fighters (Hearns) or whatever you want to look at
Same size, hearns would still be taller, faster and more powerful. Duran is just an overrated panamanian animal....
