Roberto Durán v Thomas Hearns

Forget the two-round blow-out in 1984 at 154lb, this is at 147lb, in 1980.

Durán has just come off a career-best victory beating Sugar Ray Leonard, Hearns is 32-0 and looking to fight Leonard.

What happens if these two meet at this weight in this year?

 

duran's chances would've been better at 147. but knowing what we know, you'd have to be nuts to pick him to win.

 

Hearns KO2

 

He´s just violated Hearns´ Daddy in ´The Brawl From Montreal´. :scratcher:

 

Duran ko 1.

 

Duran was a monster at 140lb and a slightly-less ferocious monster at 147.
Hearns in 1980 didnt have the smarts or experience to keep him away....

Duran late.

 

Duran is P4P the better fighter, and he's by far the greater fighter.... but head-to-head, whether it's 147, 154, or 160, Hearns is just a style nightmare for him.

 

Yeah, Hearns always beats Duran

 

The Duran will smite you all

 

Based on one very quick, frantic and desperate blow-out?
Hearns caught fire that night cos he knew he had to or he´d be in deep-shit.
Same reason Hagler wimped out of a toe-to-toe with him the year earlier.

At 147lb, its very different.

 

Hearns by Mid Rounds TKO

 

2 EXAGGERATIONS in 1 Post...Not Bad...






REED:hammert:

 

But Hearns was STILL 6'2, w/a MILE Looooooooooooooong Left Jab, MURDEROUS Right Cross, Handspeed to Burn and MURDEROUS Intent...Hearns Didn't Beat Duran via "Smarts" Or "Experience", he Beat Him via Being a Stylistic NIGHTMARE...

And that Would Be the Case @ ANY Weight they Met...







REED:hammert:

 

Jones-Tarver II was a "Desperate Blow Out", Dude...Tarver Catches Roy in an Exchange and Lands a 1 in a Million Shot, w/his Fucking EYE'S CLOSED, No Less...

Hearns-Duran was Anything BUT...Hearns Kicked Duran's Ass Every Second of Both Rounds, THEN Put him to Sleep...The Absolute BEST Case Scenario for Duran is Going the DISTANCE w/Hearns, but he NEVER Beats Him...

There's Literally NATHAN To Base a Duran Victory On, OTHER than Nuthuggery...






REED:hammert:

 

Duran would be completely weight drained and get KO'd in five rounds

 

You know the reason Duran fared so badly vs Hearns in´84 right? Spent all his time in camp trying to lose weight. Whiskey and filet-mignon.
Hearns had one of the best camps in boxing history going in. Sparring partners were Breland, McCallum, Sweet Pea, Tate and McCrory. :tick:
Even then, Durán had never been close to being KTFO, Hearns or not.

Don´t forget, this is a prime pre-No Más Duran we´re talking about and one that had been beaten four times in 3 years at 154-160lb.
And its against the guy who then was the ´Motor City Cobra´ whose best win was against Pipino Cuevas: loads of power but a rough-diamond.


This isnt as clear-cut-a- blow-out as all the Duran overraters are claiming...:nono:

 

:Laugh102:

 

All fact. opcorn:

You´re just basing your views on ´stylistic nightmare´ based on a fight 3-4 years later.

Hearns in 1980 was a skinny rake, under-developed and would probably come in under 147.
Duran would pressure, slip those rangy shots, get inside and tattoo the Cobra´s ribs for fun.

A prime, focused, passionate, angry Duran is among the Top 5 most formidable fighters in the history of the sport.

 

Duran's defense in Montreal ´80 was significantly better than what he later showed when he faced Tommy. He made Leonard miss even more than when he fought Wilfredo Benitez and Randy Shields. As a welterweight in late ´70s, he also dropped Monroe Brooks for the count with a bodyshot.
After seeing what Hearns had just done to Cuevas, he would have been more fully prepared mentally and physically for Hearns' firepower.

Duran was certainly overconfident that Hearns could not hurt him after he'd gone 15 rounds with Marvin Hagler, especially since Hearns had not repeated the devastating nature of his ambush of Cuevas in the following four years since 1980. That would have been Duran's mindset in 1980.
Like Leonard did in his unification match with Hearns, Duran would have approached Hearns with due caution.
It also needs to be remembered that if Duran had met up with Hearns immediately following Montreal, he would have still had Ray Arcel and Freddie Brown in his corner.

Hearns at 147, he wasn't quite as durable, especially to the body. Duran would not have made the mistake of giving ground and punching room that Cuevas did. (Nor would he have been wearing slippery leather soled footwear like Pipino.)
My expectation is that he would slip under Hearns, and bore into Hearns's then-almost skeletal torso.

What Duran expected in 1984 was the Hearns who went the distance with Wilfredo Benitez, Luigi Minchillo and Murray Sutherland, not the welterweight killer who dispatched Cuevas a few years earlier. In 1980, with the fresh understanding of how devastating Tommy could be, a surprisingly different outcome might have unfolded.

So, in fairness here: either Hearns wins a lopsided decision by keeping Duran away from his skinny frame, or Duran gets him out late.

 

Exactly. It wasn't a one punch ko. It was a two rounds beating and Duran didn't seem able to avoid anything Hearns was throwing.

 

:atu:

More Manos de Piedras FANBOY BULLSHIT...

A "Prime, Focused, Angry Duran"???::...This is the Type of Shit Nuthuggers Like Ya'll CLING to, to JUSTIFY His Losses...And it's RIDICULOUS...

Again, there's Literally NATHAN to Base Your Opinion On, ASIDE from Nuthuggery...







REED:zz:

 

Pound 4 pound Duran accomplished more, no doubt.

But at 147 pounds with both at their best, you gotta go with Hearns... The height/reach, the hand speed, the power...

Hearns is MADE to beat Duran, especially at welterweight and above.

I say it's more competitive and Duran gets in there and does some damage early, but Hearns would weather that storm and likely take out Duran in no later than 8 rounds.

It's a matter of styles.

 

But I´m not even a Durannie! :dunno:

You have to look at what kind of fighter Hearns was in 1980 to understand a MM between him and Duran.
He had a big win against Bruce Curry and the major KO of Cuevas who had a great chin, but was a limited slugger and that night, wearing slippery-soled boots for whatever reason. And he tried to fight Hearns at distance.
Following this, and most alarimingly is a pts win over Mike Colbert who Hearns flushed with rights all night and a labored points win over Randy Shields who was boxing with a knackered shoulder for most of that fight - Hearns couldnt put him away.
Then we have Leonard I and if Leonard had continued to fight Hearns tentatively and at distance, he too would have lost that fight. He didn´t, he got inside, worked Hearns body and got the late stoppage.

 

You've Got a FUNNY Way of Showing It...

Here's YOUR Characterization of Hearns-Duran, "one very quick, frantic and desperate blow-out?"...In Actuality, Hearns WASN'T the Least Bit Rushed, Hurried or Frantic that Night...It's NOT Like he Was Leaping In, Throwing Wild Haymakers...Hearns did what he NORMALLY Did...Jabbed his Way In, Threw the Right Cross...Jab/Cross and an Occasional Left Hook...The Mile Loooooooooooong Jab BLINDED Duran Quite a Bit and the Speed/Power of the Cross REPEATEDLY Hurt Him Throughout...

Hearns Fought NO Different Against Duran than he Did Against Cuevas, Honestly...And he ENDED Durant No Different than he Ended Cuevas...Young Hearns, Older Hearns, DIDN'T Matter!!!....

"A prime, focused, passionate, angry Duran". :: This is QUINTESSENTIAL, "Durannie", Nuthugging Bullshit, Bro...Duran's Gotten EVERY CONCEIVABLE Benefit of the Doubt for EVERY SINGLE One of his Losses...NO Other Fighter has their Less than Shining Moments GLOSSED OVER to the Degree Duran Does...

Sorry, but That's FANBOY Shit...There's NATHAN to Be Gleaned from Hearns-Duran that Suggests Duran Could Last the Distance w/Hearns, Nevermind BEAT Him...It's Like Making a Case for a "Prime, Focused, Passionate, Angry" Joe Frazier REVERSING the Outcome of the Foreman Fights...




REED:hammert:

 

That pretty much covers it. Hearns was all wrong for Duran.

 

Youre still focussing way too much on a fight that happened in 1984 at 7lb higher when both fighters were a different animal.
And to compare Cuevas to Duran? No no no, come on man. :nono:

Fact is, Hearns ´80 was not as rounded-a-fighter as he was in 84, definatly not as physically developed in ´84.
In contrast, Duran was on-the-slide.
And Duran went into that fight expecting the Heans we saw against Benitez, Sutherland, Minchillo - not the one-shot KO artist of Cuevas.
Look at Duran in Montreal vs Leonard I: he took some huge shots off Leonard...huge....and brushed them off. And Leonard was no slouch when it came to punching: he was 27-0 and in that 12-18 month period had started to set his feet an take guys out (case in point, Dave ´Boy´ Green was fucking unconscious for minutes after that left-hook.)
Duran took all of Leonard's best hooks and uppercuts. He was getting under his straight's rights.
Duran showed no upper body movement against Hearns, at least not compared to what he displayed in Montreal. He was clearly fired up against Leonard in a way he conspicuously was not with Hearns (see above posts for memory-jog).

Look at all the respectful glove-touching Duran had with Hearns during their ´84 encounter. It´s embarrassing.
Duran was most effective when he had some dislike or lack of respect for his opponents (or in this case, an over-estimation of his chin following his visit to 160lb against Hagler)

The attitude Duran showed against Hearns is the same attitude is showed against someone like Kirkland Laing.

You guys saying ´this style, that style´ are using that as a cover for your dislike of the kudos Duran gets these days or....you´re a out-and-out Hearns fan.
Or, sorry to say, you simply havent watched enough fights from that era to reason what each fighter was like. :dunno:

 

I wouldn't be surprised if Duran acting so respectfully to Hearns was due to fear. The size difference between the two was enormous, and little duran surely knew he was in for a painful night just by looking across the ring.

 

Fear of Hearns at 154lb....yet no fear of Hagler at 160lb? :dunno:

 

Hagler looked physically much smaller than hearns

 

::

´´It´s not the size of the dog in the fight...it´s the size of the fight in the dog´´