BoxRec

Everyone knows what happened when these two met at 154,but I wonder if it would have been different at 147.WHAT IF,instead of giving Leonard an immediate rematch,Duran,who at this time was riding high in confidence,took that same fire,speed,power,and aggression against Hearns.By the time they actually fought,Duran while still far above average,was on the downslide,(bigtime!)In this fight,Duran would be close to prime,and much better defensively & quicker than Cuevas was against Hearns.Is it possible that Duran could expose Hearns chin?Would Duran deftly slip,slide,deke,& dodge Hearns power shots to get in close and ravage him?Not likely,but it is NOT IMPOSSIBLE,
zuru

I think Tommy would have won on points.

He had Duran's number & the style to beat him.

Nothing would change. Hearns by brutal ko every single time.

At 135 -140 Duran was ferocious.

Stepping up to 147 and beyond he lost some of that power and had to rely on his vast experience, similar to Ali after his lay off.

At 147 Hearns was a machine. Remember only Leonard beat him at that weight.

I think if Duran fought Tommy first, before he met Leonard, then Duran wins.

Roberto was not the same fighter after "No Mas" sure he gave Hagler a scare and went on to win two more World Titles but the Duran that went out to meet Hearns that night was a shadow.

At 147 we could have had one of two fights.

Pre-Leonard, I think Roberto had the tools to defeat Hearns. After the Sugarman was finished with the pair of them. I would have to go with Tommy on any given night.

Both of them lost big time to Leonard, but it took more out of Duran psychologically and because of that I think Hearns would beat Duran at 147 -154.

P4P I still think Duran was a far better fighter than Hearns but bi=oth at their best were pretty awesome to watch.

Hearns was a genetic freak at this weight. It's hard to imagine a smaller man beating him at welterweight. In fact I think that he would have won a reamcth with Leonard at this weight. The first Leonard-Hearns fight was so close.

Anyway, I think style-wise we'd see a very similar fight to the one at 154. Yes, Duran would be younger and quicker but he's got to get inside that reach

I don't see much difference in the ending, except maybe Duran makes it five rounds at his best at 147, but eventually Hearns destroy's him at that weight!

Hearns kayoes Duran in five.

In real time I'd go with Hearns no matter what. But change the clock a bit I think it becomes a pick em fight and I'd bet on Duran. Hearns was Born in 58 Duran in 51. More than 7 years difference.

Put them in that weight class at the same age and Duran wins 2 out of 3 and I think I'm givin Tommy more credit than I should.

Duran at his absolute best would never be competitive with prime Hearns. Styles make fights, and Hearns style was posion to Duran. Hearn's superior boxing skill with one punch knockout power would spell doom for Duran.

Hard to argue since that is exacty what did happen. However I'm of the belief that that was a fluke and might not happen twice. I think Duran at his best would be slipping that power until it was more manageable and then turning the lights out on the Motor City Cobra.

its only a 7 pound difference. i dont see it having muhc affect on the fight. Hearns by mid to late KOO

On Duran's best night at WW, Hearns still has the faster hands, bigger punch, and a huge reach advantage. That spells disaster for Roberto. The Hitman by mid round stoppage.

But that Duran in Montreal against Leonard was unforgettable. I do not think no one would hve beaten him that Duran.

Sugar Ray would have beat Duran in Motreal if he would have fought his fight like he did the second time around and had not gotten drawn into a machismo contest.

When Duran had something to prove, like Ali, he would have been in th greatest of shape...Duran by KO in 10.

Typical Duran cheerleading to explain away his not so impressive peformances. When he won, nobody could have beat him that night. If he lost, it had to be because he wasnt prepared, motivated,or had a bellyache.
Nothing, absolutely nothing in the Hearns fight demonstrated that under any other conditions, Duran would have won.

I agree theone. But you get a shot like that in and it's all over. But how often does that happen with a fighter who can move like Duran could at times? That shot would have taken out Leonard, I hesitate to say it would have taken out Hagler. Something not human about Hagler's noggin.

I should make clear that I have never liked Hearns and enjoyed immensely each of his losses. That said he'd beat Duran, the bvetter fighter overall, 99 of 100 times. Styles

Tommy Hearns would have been the greatest fighter of all time, if he had a chin like Hagler's & stamina to match.

Syntax Error wrote:Tommy Hearns would have been the greatest fighter of all time, if he had a chin like Hagler's & stamina to match.

I agree. The combination of pwer, speed and skill was great to watch.

Tommy Hearns just a good chin shy of being the all time best? Bit of a stretch. I'm not knockin him I think he is an all time great, but in the top 5 of all time? Or top 10? Ok I have to go back and think about this.

You know I don't like to over react and I like to think about all the possiblities.

He lost to Hagler and Leonard at his best when they were also at there best.......no shame at all. Beat Duran easily at his best....though this was well past Duran's best moments. Another mark in his favor.

Looks like I'm headin for the tapes on this one....Always lliked watching Tommy fight for sure.

BoxBuzz wrote:Tommy Hearns just a good chin shy of being the all time best? Bit of a stretch. I'm not knockin him I think he is an all time great, but in the top 5 of all time? Or top 10? Ok I have to go back and think about this.

You know I don't like to over react and I like to think about all the possiblities.

He lost to Hagler and Leonard at his best when they were also at there best.......no shame at all. Beat Duran easily at his best....though this was well past Duran's best moments. Another mark in his favor.

Looks like I'm headin for the tapes on this one....Always lliked watching Tommy fight for sure.

I think so.

You couldn't outbox him, unless you were called Iran Barkley.

He lost to SRL due to stamina problems & he lost to Hagler because he stupidly tried to KO the toughest man in middleweight history, in my opinion. He should have boxed against Hagler, as Marvin was past his best & had lost a bit of speed.

Hearns had the best combination of speed, boxing skill & one shot power in boxing history.

Syntax, chin and stamina are big issues. And I would say Monzon had Hagler beat in that dept. But still I get your point.

And of course using your logic Primo Carnera is just a few deficits away from being the greatest himself. I hang pretty tough with the "no excuses" philosophy. Syntax I like your input don't get me wrong. And Hearns was one hell of a good fighter but his losses speak volumes about his weaknesses.

I'm not sure he would even be dominating over a prime Duran but so far the concensus here is that he would. Which if true has to put him in the top half dozen in my mind.

It would probably go a few extra rounds but same result.

hawaiianpunch wrote:It would probably go a few extra rounds but same result.

I agree with this. There is no reason to think 7 pounds would make that much of a difference. Duran was a little quicker but so was Hearns. Hearns within 5 rounds.

theone wrote:

But that Duran in Montreal against Leonard was unforgettable. I do not think no one would hve beaten him that Duran.

Sugar Ray would have beat Duran in Motreal if he would have fought his fight like he did the second time around and had not gotten drawn into a machismo contest.

When Duran had something to prove, like Ali, he would have been in th greatest of shape...Duran by KO in 10.

Typical Duran cheerleading to explain away his not so impressive peformances. When he won, nobody could have beat him that night. If he lost, it had to be because he wasnt prepared, motivated,or had a bellyache.
Nothing, absolutely nothing in the Hearns fight demonstrated that under any other conditions, Duran would have won.

You do not seem to give Duran any credit for taking away from SRL what little foot movement he used in fights up until that point. SRL fought the fight he did that night in Montreal because Duran controled the fight that night.
When he fought Hearns, it was after he had won the junior Middleweight title from Moore, and had gone 15 rounds with Hagler when everyone else was to scared to fight him (Hagler) up until that point! Duran was not into that fight you could see it in his conditioning his body was not taunt and he was not mentally ready, not excuses just that he was not up for it and alot of fighters especially ones with alot of fights under their belts like Duran don't get "up" for all the fights they are in.
Duran at his best like he was in Montreal beats SRL each and every time!
Hearns on the other hand who knows, long reach, great boxing skills and about 2 feet taller than Duran, how could he reach his head?

cheers M.O.

SRL didnt use his movement in Montreal, he wanted to slug and knock Duran out. The second fight proved Leonards supiriority. Alot of the fight game is mental, and if Duran, a seasoned pro, chooses to enter the ring less than motivated then it shouldnt count against his opponent. Not being motivated against a Strickland Laing is one thing,I could kinda see that, but Tommy Hearns? Im not buying that. Durans life could have been on the line and still there is no way he was beating Hearns, that night or any night.