who was better Duran or Oscar both as lightweights

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 29 May 2005, 01:47

Hey i am looking for a debate anyone want to come up wit a new interesting topic ??? by the way my names nick gamble, im 18. I have been reading watching and studying history of boxing for the past 6 years. and I am going to college and hope to become a boxing historian some day. or work for HBO boxing. I love that HBO boxing song lol.

tiredoldngrey · Post by **tiredoldngrey** » 29 May 2005, 15:51

Duran eats DLH. No contest. But allow me one exception. If ODLH had retained Rivero as trainer he would still be undefeated today- though at the stage of his career during which he was 135 he'd never beat Duran . I am of the opinion that a series of so-called great trainers ruined him for their own profit, senile Mayweather being as bad as clancy and steward. I love boxing debates- I'll keep track of this spot.

Manos de Oro · Post by **Manos de Oro** » 29 May 2005, 16:58

Duran was the better lightweight.

Here's another one: who was better at welterweight between De La Hoya and Jose Napoles?

KOJOE90 · Post by **KOJOE90** » 29 May 2005, 17:37

Duran would have too much heat for De La Hoya at Lightweight.

Duran hands out a 12 round beating.

meade95 · Post by **meade95** » 29 May 2005, 19:30

Not even a contest - At LW Duran beats the hell out of DLH.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 30 May 2005, 00:06

yeah tiredold, Duran is just so much better than any other lightweight in history i had to find one that i thought is is one of the best in history. and de la hoya beat everyone pretty easily at light weight and light welter weight.

How bout some of the old timers like barney ross, or even a guy like ike williams or henry armstrong?? could they have beaten duran??

it looks to me as though duran wipes out this division

thunderfromdownunder · Post by **thunderfromdownunder** » 30 May 2005, 02:06

OSCAR WINS

Syntax Error · Post by **Syntax Error** » 30 May 2005, 05:22

Roberto Duran is all time great, ODLH just sits a tier below.

Duran was better.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 30 May 2005, 09:34

Duran was in a different class to Oscar who has been helped by lack of competition and the multiple world titles. Oscar would never had won all the titles he has if he had been fighting 30 or even 20 years ago... the guy really has never impressed me much.
The guys who rival Duran at Lightweight are Joe Gans, Benny Leonard, Henry Armstrong...

lumpymo · Post by **lumpymo** » 30 May 2005, 17:19

I agree with silcov on this, Duran is head and shoulders above DLH, at lightweight, welterweight, junior middleweight, and maybe even at middleweight. DLH was another one that tried to pick fights that assured himself a win, but the only problem was he wasn't that good to be able to pull it off, like say SRL did.

cheers M.O.

enrique · Post by **enrique** » 30 May 2005, 19:15

Oscar to Duran is like a Ford Focus to a Bentley.

Gordon · Post by **Gordon** » 01 Jun 2005, 04:43

I totally agree and a second hand Focus at that.

Duran was prabably THE best Lightweight in the history of that division.

Gans, Armstrong & Leonard (Benny) were in there with him and I would be hard pressed to pick between the 4 of them.

But in the last 30 - 40 years NOBODY touched Duran.

DeJesus beat him but Roberto nailed him in 2 re-matches.

My fellow countryman Buchanan may claim to have won on the night, but no matter how often I watch the tape for that one I still see Roberto winning.

NO Roberto Duran would have easily defeated Oscar at any weight.

Oscar was No Sugar Ray Leonard.

Manos de Oro · Post by **Manos de Oro** » 01 Jun 2005, 06:40

Duran didn't become a complete fighter till around the time of his move to welterweight, in my opinion. Sometimes at lightweight he was too intense and it spoiled his work. DeJesus could have won the rematch if he hadn't succumbed to heat, in my opinion. And by 'heat' I mean the environmental AND physical aspects. He had the perfect style to beat the 135lbs Duran - what I call 'dial movement', plus the ability to sit in the clinch (he could sit in the clinch with Duran all day) and work upwards.
You'd think the movement would be the key factor in how Ike Williams would beat Duran, but I don't think that would be the case. Williams would shift back and shoot forward like a piston. Of course, this could cause hell to an opponent relying on Duran's constant come-forward style. The real important thing to note, however, is that he'd shift back (unlike DeJesus) meaning that he could, and often was, pinned with his back against the ropes. This is Duran's territory now - at some point he'd catch Williams with a bomb, I think. It may be eerily similar to the Ray Lampkin fight.

The one fighter I'd give a strong shot at cleanly beating a lightweight Duran is Joe Gans.

* He was big for 135lbs, so could hang in the clinches no problem.

* He had the 'dial movement', so was unpinnable against the ropes.

* He was smaller than Duran, so would have no problem working upward like DeJesus did.

* The Old Master's lateral tricks would have had Duran in knots, and maddened him out his fight plan cf. Leonard 2, Viruet 2.

* Duran never defended the title against anyone with the punching power of Gans.

Gans TKO 12 Duran, in one of the most shocking shutouts in ring history.

_____________

I'm not suggesting Duran was incapable of beating the previous greats - far from it. Just trying to play a bit of devil's advocate, because I don't think Duran at lightweight was unbeatable. In fact, I don't think any fighter is, however close they seem to be.

ShoeShine · Post by **ShoeShine** » 01 Jun 2005, 14:06

Duran....Duran probably is the best lightweight of all time...

tiredoldngrey · Post by **tiredoldngrey** » 01 Jun 2005, 15:58

Interesting take on Joe Gans and one I tend to agree with. A lot of people discount those early gloved boxers because they clinched frequently and because they often threw single punches. But consider this: hand injuries were rampant then so you tended to place punches to maximize damage done while risking your hand as little as possible. Many fighters of this era throw lots of punches but do little damage; I think it would be an advantage to land a precise counter, then throw more punches or clinch. Also, in those days the clinch was more than a hang on and rest or sos tatic. It was wrestling, Sort of, and an integral part of wearing a man down. Given Duran's often forgetting to train while at 135 and Gans' ability defensively, I could see him land hurtful body punches, mmaking Duran miss, clinching and using his tatical advantage to further tire Duran, maybe late ko or wide UD.

ferocity · Post by **ferocity** » 01 Jun 2005, 19:48

I think you guys are underrating Delahoya at lightweight. At lighweight Delahoya hit like a brick. And had a good jab and knew how to use the ring if he needed to. I don't think he'd beat Duran but I also don't think Duran would ko Delahoya, maybe, maybe a late tko.

Delahoya is taller, also has dangerous power at lightweight and has good movement. I see Duran taking a descision. You got to remember a young Delahoya whenever in trouble would let them bombs fly and if he cought his opponet it was bye, bye. Duran has no easy time with Delahoya.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 01 Jun 2005, 23:43

I agree with u freocity about De La Hoya at lightweight. THe guy was only 21, 22 years old but he was fast powerful man with lightning quick cominations and he beat everyone pretty easily. De la Hoya is definetly an underated lightweight and he has a lot of heart and he is on of the top 3 boxers of the nineties.
However, its Roberto Duran who is not only can box, but is one of the best sluggers pound for pound and as good as slugger de la hoya is, hes no duran but i can see the fight being close and duran stopping de la hoya in the later rounds by liek TKO 12 in a 15 round fight. with the scorecards being nearly even. De la hoya has trouble in the later rounds.

ferocity · Post by **ferocity** » 02 Jun 2005, 01:11

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:I agree with u freocity about De La Hoya at lightweight. THe guy was only 21, 22 years old but he was fast powerful man with lightning quick cominations and he beat everyone pretty easily. De la Hoya is definetly an underated lightweight and he has a lot of heart and he is on of the top 3 boxers of the nineties.
However, its Roberto Duran who is not only can box, but is one of the best sluggers pound for pound and as good as slugger de la hoya is, hes no duran but i can see the fight being close and duran stopping de la hoya in the later rounds by liek TKO 12 in a 15 round fight. with the scorecards being nearly even. De la hoya has trouble in the later rounds.

I forgot all about 15 rounds, in that matter I agree, a late tko by Duran. But still in a tough fight.

ferocity · Post by **ferocity** » 02 Jun 2005, 19:09

just seen Delahoya v. Molinia

Duran tko.

dnahar32 · Post by **dnahar32** » 02 Jun 2005, 19:33

I think one thing to consider about De La Hoya at lightweight is who he fought. While he destroyed Ruelas, the acknowledged man at lightweight during the time was Orzubek Nazarov and De La Hoya didn't fight him. Molina gave Oscar a grueling fight and was a worthy challenge. But Oscar wasn't challenged much by the light-hitting Leija, Genaro Hernandez, or the former featherweight Paez. Some of it is how good DeLaHoya is, but the opposition was carefully selected as well. Consequently, we cannot fully gauge what he would have done against a great rival at that weight.

Duran, on the other hand, fought much better fighters, some who are all-time greats. Buchanan, Lampkin, DeJesus multiple times, etc. When you fight better fighters, some of your weaknesses are bound to come through because the other fighter is great as well. In my opinion, Buchanan would beat DeLaHoya with his jab and his experience would have overwhelmed a green DeLaHoya in a close fight on points (especially if we're considering 15 rounds). DeJesus-DeLaHoya would be a contest to see who could KO who first, a great matchup.

I think Duran has a clear advantage over DeLaHoya, although I agree that a Gans-Duran matchup could easily go either way.

ferocity · Post by **ferocity** » 02 Jun 2005, 22:43

Delahoya clearly won his fight with Molina but what got me thinking is what if that was Duran with Delahoya?

A guy who can really hit.

Also looking back at this fight tells me Delahoya could have been even greater then he is because Delahoya used to have a killer left hook but what happened? To many trainers wanting to put their knowlege to Delahoya and cofused the guy.

lumpymo · Post by **lumpymo** » 07 Jun 2005, 20:30

tiredoldngrey wrote:Interesting take on Joe Gans and one I tend to agree with. A lot of people discount those early gloved boxers because they clinched frequently and because they often threw single punches. But consider this: hand injuries were rampant then so you tended to place punches to maximize damage done while risking your hand as little as possible. Many fighters of this era throw lots of punches but do little damage; I think it would be an advantage to land a precise counter, then throw more punches or clinch. Also, in those days the clinch was more than a hang on and rest or sos tatic. It was wrestling, Sort of, and an integral part of wearing a man down. Given Duran's often forgetting to train while at 135 and Gans' ability defensively, I could see him land hurtful body punches, mmaking Duran miss, clinching and using his tatical advantage to further tire Duran, maybe late ko or wide UD.

I think your refering to the days of bare knuckle fighting when they had all the hand injuries so they threw few punches and clinched alot, gloves were invented to speed up the action by protecting the hands. They did still wrestle alot back then after gloves were made, but the sport has evolved since then into better fighters being better skilled and more action.

cheers M.O.