BoxRec

why didnt this fight happen did arguello not want to move up or was the money not enough? i have a mag from 84 saying it was a posibility and a pic of duran holding a photo of arguello up

Adamj1987 wrote:why didnt this fight happen did arguello not want to move up or was the money not enough? i have a mag from 84 saying it was a posibility and a pic of duran holding a photo of arguello up

Duran was too big! Prime 4 prime RD kills him.

Duran was bigger &, even though I will always label him over-rated, the better fighter, regardless of size.

If Arguello couldn't beat Pryor at 140lbs, he wasn't going to stop Duran (much harder to hit clean, for one thing) at 135lbs, either.

As for why it didn't happen, I can't honestly say. It's rarely been discussed openly. Whatever the reason, Arguello was right to look elsewhere for opposition. I certainly don't think, "Duran kills him" like our resident goose above (more ignorance in the face of the brilliance which was Arguello), but he would almost certainly succeed.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Duran was bigger &, even though I will always label him over-rated, the better fighter, regardless of size.

If Arguello couldn't beat Pryor at 140lbs, he wasn't going to stop Duran (much harder to hit clean, for one thing) at 135lbs, either.

As for why it didn't happen, I can't honestly say. It's rarely been discussed openly. Whatever the reason, Arguello was right to look elsewhere for opposition. I certainly don't think, "Duran kills him" like our resident goose above (more ignorance in the face of the brilliance which was Arguello), but he would almost certainly succeed.

Let me guess G,I. Whitaker would've beaten them both by 11 rounds to 1.

Adamj1987 wrote:why didnt this fight happen did arguello not want to move up or was the money not enough? i have a mag from 84 saying it was a posibility and a pic of duran holding a photo of arguello up

Vilomar Fernandez is why it didn't happen. He beat Arguello in a Lightweight tune up and Duran was struggling to make Lightweight so he moved up for good.

Diamond WEAPON wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Duran was bigger &, even though I will always label him over-rated, the better fighter, regardless of size.

If Arguello couldn't beat Pryor at 140lbs, he wasn't going to stop Duran (much harder to hit clean, for one thing) at 135lbs, either.

As for why it didn't happen, I can't honestly say. It's rarely been discussed openly. Whatever the reason, Arguello was right to look elsewhere for opposition. I certainly don't think, "Duran kills him" like our resident goose above (more ignorance in the face of the brilliance which was Arguello), but he would almost certainly succeed.

Let me guess G,I. Whitaker would've beaten them both by 11 rounds to 1.

What has your contempt for Whitaker got to do with this subject?

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Diamond WEAPON wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Duran was bigger &, even though I will always label him over-rated, the better fighter, regardless of size.

If Arguello couldn't beat Pryor at 140lbs, he wasn't going to stop Duran (much harder to hit clean, for one thing) at 135lbs, either.

As for why it didn't happen, I can't honestly say. It's rarely been discussed openly. Whatever the reason, Arguello was right to look elsewhere for opposition. I certainly don't think, "Duran kills him" like our resident goose above (more ignorance in the face of the brilliance which was Arguello), but he would almost certainly succeed.

Let me guess G,I. Whitaker would've beaten them both by 11 rounds to 1.

What has your contempt for Whitaker got to do with this subject?

Overratedness. It's all good though, at least you acknowledged Duran would win.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Diamond WEAPON wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Duran was bigger &, even though I will always label him over-rated, the better fighter, regardless of size.

If Arguello couldn't beat Pryor at 140lbs, he wasn't going to stop Duran (much harder to hit clean, for one thing) at 135lbs, either.

As for why it didn't happen, I can't honestly say. It's rarely been discussed openly. Whatever the reason, Arguello was right to look elsewhere for opposition. I certainly don't think, "Duran kills him" like our resident goose above (more ignorance in the face of the brilliance which was Arguello), but he would almost certainly succeed.

Let me guess G,I. Whitaker would've beaten them both by 11 rounds to 1.

What has your contempt for Whitaker got to do with this subject?

I don't think Weapon can go a day without a stupid Whitaker crack. He desperately needs new material. Irrational posting is bearable when it's funny.

"Over-ratedness?" That's not a word.

In any event, yes, Duran would beat Arguello. I can't see much of an argument against that, IMO.

Make no mistake, either --- I'm fully-aware Whitaker would, "lose" to Duran. I would bet the house on it, in fact. We all know how that fight would go down. Whitaker would have to knock Duran & his mother out to get a decision against the Holy One. Doesn't mean he wouldn't out-point Duran in reality, AKA, independently of the scorecards. He would

Pernell would have schooled Arguello.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:"Over-ratedness?" That's not a word.

In any event, yes, Duran would beat Arguello. I can't see much of an argument against that, IMO.

Make no mistake, either --- I'm fully-aware Whitaker would, "lose" to Duran. I would bet the house on it, in fact. We all know how that fight would go down. Whitaker would have to knock Duran & his mother out to get a decision against the Holy One. Doesn't mean he wouldn't out-point Duran in reality, AKA, independently of the scorecards. He would

Sure it's a word, you understood what I meant, no?

C'mon man, Duran killed a bull with a single punch, Whitaker would've been humiliated worse than Leonard then probably would've cried wolf again to whomever had the misfortune of interviewing his cry-baby ass afterwards. Aside from being overrated he also shares with Holmes the ability to be an incessant complainer.

duran was ducking him,duran would not of lasted 5 rounds against the much more talented boxer

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Pernell would have schooled Arguello.

I can only think of one man in all the world who might disagree.

Arguello wouldn't get a decision against Whitaker in Nicaragua. Like Duran, Whitaker was both bigger & better, but unlike Duran, Whitaker would be stylistically-awful for Arguello to boot.

Diamond WEAPON wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:"Over-ratedness?" That's not a word.

In any event, yes, Duran would beat Arguello. I can't see much of an argument against that, IMO.

Make no mistake, either --- I'm fully-aware Whitaker would, "lose" to Duran. I would bet the house on it, in fact. We all know how that fight would go down. Whitaker would have to knock Duran & his mother out to get a decision against the Holy One. Doesn't mean he wouldn't out-point Duran in reality, AKA, independently of the scorecards. He would

Sure it's a word, you understood what I meant, no?

C'mon man, Duran killed a bull with a single punch, Whitaker would've been humiliated worse than Leonard then probably would've cried wolf again to whomever had the misfortune of interviewing his cry-baby ass afterwards. Aside from being overrated he also shares with Holmes the ability to be an incessant complainer.

"I bought a puppee at the pound yesterday."

This is not a word, even if you understand me.

No Lightweight who ever lived humiliates Whitaker. Let's get that much straight. He's competing with absolutely anyone you can name.

Whatever you think of a fight with Duran, it's pretty rich of you to take aim at Whitaker for being, "a cry-baby." Duran quit in absolutely appalling circumstances, & his fans are among the most one-eyed I ever did see. Who else (besides Tyson, of course) has their losses either completely mooted, or exempted from discussion altogether?

You should know I'm just screwing around. I'm sure Whitaker would at the very least be competitive with anyone from 135-147 who's ever existed.

Diamond WEAPON wrote:You should know I'm just screwing around. I'm sure Whitaker would at the very least be competitive with anyone from 135-147 who's ever existed.

Now finish the thought. "Yes, he would beat Duran, but get screwed on the decision"

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Diamond WEAPON wrote:You should know I'm just screwing around. I'm sure Whitaker would at the very least be competitive with anyone from 135-147 who's ever existed.

Now finish the thought. "Yes, he would beat Duran, but get screwed on the decision"

Can't do it friend. I think Duran would legitimately beat him in a close fight. Whitaker wasn't just a defensive specialist. He had a good amount of power along with fast hands, which helped him beat a lot of his smaller opponents with relative ease. Duran at the very least would've had Whitaker moving for every second of every round and would've taken Pernell's shots much better than pretty much everyone Whitaker faced. He'd have edged him out with his body work when too many others were over-focused on trying to hit Whitaker in the face.

I can live with that scenario --- Duran was a spectacular, spectacular fighter. I do think Whitaker would have to win nine rounds to get the nod, though, because Duran would've been infinitely more popular if the fight ever happened.

Diamond WEAPON wrote:
C'mon man, Duran killed a bull with a single punch, Whitaker would've been humiliated worse than Leonard then probably would've cried wolf again to whomever had the misfortune of interviewing his cry-baby ass afterwards. Aside from being overrated he also shares with Holmes the ability to be an incessant complainer.

Why you hate Whitaker so much?

Whitaker could hold more than his own against Duran. Whitaker totally dominated Ramirez and Chavez and was robbed twice. They did not win more than 4 rounds between the two of them against Whitaker. Also, his fight vs DLH could have gone either way in my opinion.

Duran/Whitaker is 50/50 in my view. More likely Duran takes the decision but I will not be surprise if Whitaker takes the decision.

Whitaker was as close to KO-proof in his prime as any fighter could be, for mine --- & no Lightweight in history was better-equipped to test that claim than Duran.

Whittaker's fights were rarely entertaining and whilst he was one of the greatest ever (best fighter of the 90s for me) he never had a performance to match the best of the generation that came before him. Duran was better than anyone he ever faced. Pernell would not be the best fighter Duran ever faced.

Whittaker beats Arguello. Styles are wrong for Alexis and he was simply too small.

Duran would be like Olivares X10.

He would probably KO Arguello

Ezzard wrote:Whittaker's fights were rarely entertaining and whilst he was one of the greatest ever (best fighter of the 90s for me) he never had a performance to match the best of the generation that came before him. Duran was better than anyone he ever faced. Pernell would not be the best fighter Duran ever faced.

Whittaker beats Arguello. Styles are wrong for Alexis and he was simply too small.

Pound-for-pound, Whitaker would be the best Duran ever faced, for mine (though it's certainly arguable, & it wouldn't be by much at all), though Duran would unquestionably would be Whitaker's best opponent.

I found Sweet Pea plenty entertaining. When do you see a fighter do those things, at that high a level of competition? It was like watching Mozart compose music. You knew you were watching a genius at work. I get much the same feeling observing Benitez (who, though it is illegal to mention, made a complete fool of Duran).

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Ezzard wrote:Whittaker's fights were rarely entertaining and whilst he was one of the greatest ever (best fighter of the 90s for me) he never had a performance to match the best of the generation that came before him. Duran was better than anyone he ever faced. Pernell would not be the best fighter Duran ever faced.

Whittaker beats Arguello. Styles are wrong for Alexis and he was simply too small.

Pound-for-pound, Whitaker would be the best Duran ever faced, for mine (though it's certainly arguable, & it wouldn't be by much at all), though Duran would unquestionably would be Whitaker's best opponent.

I found Sweet Pea plenty entertaining. When do you see a fighter do those things, at that high a level of competition? It was like watching Mozart compose music. You knew you were watching a genius at work. I get much the same feeling observing Benitez (who, though it is illegal to mention, made a complete fool of Duran).

That is an excellent point and I agree 100%. Most people argue that Duran was past his best, but I don’t buy that. I think more likely was that Duran struggle with his style.

Duran lost to or should I say quit against Leonard because Leonard gave him angles that he couldn’t find an answer for.

For me stylistically Benitez was a nightmare for Duran.

Head to head, both at their best, I will always pick Benitez to beat Duran. Not because he was the better fighter, but because style make fights.

Style wise Whitaker has the tools to defeat Duran. That is why I make this fight a 50/50.

Nope. Duran was, "fat & disinterested," when he lost to Benitez.

As he was for all his defeats