http://sports.inquirer.net/197073/d...or-pound-fighter-not-mayweather#ixzz3pjawj4vJ This ought to be fun.
To be fair, Roberto Duran was pretty focking amazing at boxing. Don't remember him as the 5'-6" guy who fought 6'-2" Tommy Hearns -- despite having absolutely no business fighting Tommy Hearns at that weight or probably any other* -- because he was too lazy to get down any lower. Don't look to that particular ass whuppin and make note that they could have fought 20 times and the outcome would have been the same in all instances. [youtube]DaESioM03g4[/youtube] No no. Remember the 132lb whirling dervish of speed and strength and aggression who was impervious to both fatigue and fear. Roberto Duran was a great lightweight. [youtube]j9cED9WxQUg[/youtube] And so it is with the utmost respect for the man -- and with nary a desire to disparage him -- that I respectfully submit that he's wrong. Floyd Mayweather Jr. has a combination of speed and technical know-how that would be too much for Duran at any weight. Please do note that Duran -- who, again, while great -- didn't really have any idea what a jab was, or how to throw one. I"m not knocking him -- Duran's an all time great. But Floyd Mayweather's better. _______________________________ *Though it bears mentioning that Aaron Pryor was also 5'-6" and would have given Tommy Hearns a competitive fight -- even winning his fair share -- at that weight or probably any other. ** **To be fair, Aaron Pryor was pretty focking amazing at boxing (and, yes, I rank him higher than Duran).
This is an excellent point, and one that often conflicts with the protestant preference for feigned humility. White people.
I love me some Duran, but he's not the best pound for pound, which will be, in all likelihood, Sugar Ray Robinson forever. However, I do have him as a little better than Money, especially at the lighter weights (Mayweather would have been in trouble with Hearns, as well. Mayweather never faced anyone with as savage a punch as Hearns.). Mayweather has great skills, but I still see him as a remarkably consistent fighter with no standout wins in a weak era and, even then, he carefully chose his opponents in pursuit of a perfect record and avoiding too much danger (Him ragging on Ali, despite Ali going through wars with waaayyyyyy better challengers than Mayweather ever faced, is almost unforgivable in this light). I did a top list a year or so ago and I believe that Duran was top ten and Money top 20. Mayweather-Duran at lightweight, though, is probably one of the top 5 possible fights I could even think of making at any weight in the history of boxing.
I don't think the weight would really matter much if they were fighting each other. Where it becomes significant is when they take on bigger guys. I'll agree that Hearns would have presented Money with a difficult matchup, but MM would have at least had the good sense to make him drop down to 146 or something. I mean for Christ sake's, fighting Tommy Hearns at 154 when you're 5-6 and your most natural weight class is a true lightweight? I suppose that's the other side of the "he had no fear" coin. Sometimes keeping it real goes bad.
I think the weight matters because Mayweather was probably his best at about 130-135 and so was Duran. Once they went up in weight, they were still great fighters, but lost a little bit and one of the reasons why Mayweather got a little more choosy over time. I also can't see Mayweather ever wanting a piece of Hearns at welterweight or anywhere considering he has been a little more selective as he's gone up in weight. Hearns is not a guy you choose to fight under those circumstances. I've also mentioned that throwing in Hagler there is unfair to Money as Hagler was a middleweight through and through, but, if Mayweather won't go up to fight Golovkin, then hell no on Marvelous. A prime Leonard vs. a prime Mayweather would have been a really good fight, too.
