At Duran's best at the weight, best he could hope for would be to win a close, maybe split decision...maybe 3 or 4 fights out of ten, the other six he gets splattered
If your name isn't Hearns I don't think you're splattering Duran. Personal opinion. And I regard Jackson as a harder puncher.
This is definitely winnable for Duran... he had a lot more skill than Jackson and Jackson isn't a 6'2 freak of nature with 8 foot arms and marvelous skill He'd have to respect Jackson's incredible punch, but say hes really on, really at his best, hed be the second best 154 pounder that Jackson ever faced and the best one stopped him in 2
Yes. Jackson may have been the better one punch banger, but Hearns brought much more to the table than Jackson. It's far too simplistic to think if Hearns did it, then Jackson would too. Duran takes this by decision.
Yep, as I said in another thread, Hearns and Jackson had completely different styles and delivered their power in starkly contrasting methods. Personally I have such problems with Duran above 147. He just wasn't consistent. He just wasn't an elite fighter. He had moments of brilliance, but he also had stretches where he was just ordinary. For every Cuevas and Moore type wins, there were Benitez and Laing type loses. Those fights happened in a year and half stretch and you honestly saw the best of Duran on par with what he did at Lightweight. But unfortunately at other moments, he looked more like the later career bloated loafer. And Julian Jackson was an animal at every single second at 154 pounds. Even in his lone loss at that weight to McCallum, Jackson was in his faces and winging bombs. I have to go with Jackson because he was just more destructive at the weight and Duran really wasn't. I think Jackson stops him somewhere around the 6th.
Jackson isnt Barkley. Duran isnt just gonna eat his left hooks, get stunned, and keep coming. No one is saying Jackson was as good as Hearns, but the man plain and simple was a scary puncher at 154 and its a bad matchup for Duran.
You're kinda making a leap here. When Duran fought Barkley, he was 5 years removed from the Hagller and Hearns portion of his career. So I don't know that is a good comparison. And like I said...it's way too easy to think "if Hearns could do it..."
Exactly....the Duran who fought Cuevas & Davey Moore was 6 years younger and sharper than the Duran who fought Barkley. And if your name wasn't 'Thomas Hearns' you weren't nailing him clean very often. Frankly Im not sure he took a single shot of the cleanness Jackson would need to turn this around in the Cuevas or Moore fights. Fuck it, Im changing my pick - Duran TKO 10.
But it's the same Duran that was out pointed by Kirkland Laing. If he was inconsistent or lazy against Jackson, like he often was over 147, then Duran gets bombed.
Duran doesn't lose mythical matchups. If he hadn't fought Hearns he'd have beaten hearns in a Mythical matchup also. That said...I have to say that I think Duran beats Jackson. Jackson would only have a punchers' chance against Duran, unlike Thomas Hearns, and unless Jackson lands the bomb and takes him out, Duran would be too skillful for him and would win.
Jackson has my vote. Duran, for me, is over-rated not only at 154, but individually at both 147 & 135 as well. His inconsistency is a huge mark against him in a fight which can end so abruptly. It was fine to putter along ineffectually against Benitez & hope for the faint chance of a KO to come along, but against Jackson, well...
In MMs I always work on the assumption guys are on their game. But of course yeah if Duran comes in untrained day dreaming about tail all bets are off.
Isn't that what everyone goes on and on about? Both fighters at their best? I suppose Duran could come in sluggish and unmotivated, but I don't think he does with a dangerous fighter who carries the rep as a huge puncher.
Well if the MM is weight specific, don't you have to consider how a guy approached fights at that weight? Seriously if you just added 20 pounds to the lightweight version of Duran then it's difficult for me to envision anyone beating him at 154 including Mike McCallum. I guess when a fighter actually fought at a certain weight I tend to use that version of him in mythical matchups. Probably wrong on my part.
First of all, why do we need to shoe-horn McCallum into this discussion? This topic has zero to do with him. If you never saw the fight or knew of the results, could you envision the Duran you are speaking of being competitive with a Middleweight as great as Hagler? Probably not. And Duran wasn't expected to be, but he was. Boxing isn't a video game...fighters, especially great fighters, are capable of rising up and doing the unexpected. Otherwise, I agree with your approach...think of the fighter when he actually fought at that weight (which I think everyone is doing - it's not like you invented it). But Duran was a bit of a special case because he was so both hot and cold at that weight. So I DON'T agree with only looking at his worst peformances when considering his chances.
Tone down the attitude. I don't give two shits if you do or don't agree with 'my approach'. I'll spew my opinions in any method I want. If you don't like how I do it or who I might 'shoe horn' into it, then skip my post. I said in my first post that Duran was inconsistent at 154 and that would cost him dearly against Jackson. So thanks for regurgitating my opinion with your own pathetic twist.
Thanks for the childish response. Did you forget your meds today? You had actually been acting decently, but I knew it was just a matter of time before you displayed your true mean-spirited douchebag self. And imagine you crying about attitude since you talk down to pretty much everyone on a regular basis. And for the record, Einstein, I was responding to something you wrote to me. It's not like I responded to your post out of the blue. I was talking to Hut Hut and then you responded to my post to him with that "blah, blah, blah, Yay McCallum!!" crap. SO...if you don't like my response to a post that was a response from you to me, then don't respond to my posts in the first place. If you respond to something I wrote, I'm gonna respond how I see fit. If you don't like it...it's really too fucking bad. And if you never respond to my posts again, then all the better... I won't have to read any more of your love letters to McCallum or any of your various other half-assed opinions. It would be like an early Christmas present. Try to have a better day.
