Thread: Watching duran

I sat and rewatched three Duran fights last night and, as always,Manos de Piedra opens eyes. The three fights were the second fight with Esteban de Jesus, Ray Lampkin and the first fight with Ray Leonard. The de Jesus fight is Duran very close to his absolute peak. Very, very fit at lightweight. The Lampkin fight is Duran less prepared but still excellent and the Leonard fight is him above his best weight but perhaps at his most elemental and savage. Here are some things I noticed.

1) Duran's Extraordinary Feet-It is true in all three fights, but most obvious in the de Jesus fight. Duran NEVER just stands in front of his foe. Once he lands a single shot he is suddenly somewhere else and throwing more shots. He fights in an arc around the other fighter. For example, if he lands a single shot while standing head to head, he moves, often to his right and is now opposite the foe's left shoulder where he throws a short right or a left hook and moves again! Other times he will take a short step to the left which usually means a left to the body, left to the head combination and another move. Duran's angles of attack are created by incredibly quick feet.

2) Overall Body Movement-Once Duran is in punching range, everything about him is moving. He is rolling his fists like the old timers. His upper body snaps back and forth taking his head with it. As I noted above his feet are always on the go. This amalgamation of movement is very tough to coordinate, very deceiving and difficult to counter. In the Lampkin fight, Duran's lower level of fitness means his feet aren't quite as good so his upper body movement becomes more prominent and noticeable. Jab, upper body rolls right, right hand, upper body weaves left, left hooks to the body and the head, feet move him out of the way. Not only is this approach offensively effective but they are defensively crucial as well. Duran's head is always moving and even when he is hit he is normally rolling with it.

3) Variety of Attack-In the De Jesus fight Duran is primarily a counterpuncher, in the Lampkin fight he is a stalker and in the Leonard fight he is the brawler. Even within those three styles Duran has substyles. But they share a couple of traits. Duran punches in no pattern except what works in that particular situation. Duran could throw every punch there is, in any order you ask, from any angle he found advantageous. He rarely throws a single punch or even two. If one of the first two lands? Look out, here comes the shifting angle and 2-3 more punches and then another angle change and 2-3 more. By the time he's done with a single exchange Duran has often thrown 6-7 punch combinations.
4) Excellent Defense-In some ways this is self evident. NOBODY can fight over 30 years and 100+ fights, many at a championship level, without being an exceptional defender. Guys who get hit just cannot last that long. Of course (George Chuvalo is an exception to all all rules in this regard). What drove Duran's defensive success are his offense, which usually kept people otherwise occupied, his constant upper body and head movement and his skill at grabbing, clinching, pushing etc. For the most part once he closed the distance? You were going to do what he wanted.

I realize comparing Duran to others is somewhat unfair as he is a once in a generation kind of athlete. BUT, watching him it just looks like he is competing in a different sport than most today. The second and third things I noted are what I see rarely today. Manny Pacquiao now uses his feet the way Duran did to find angles and his variety of attack is now awfully good, though that is a recent development. Joe Calzaghe's upper body movement, while of a different look that Duran's, makes him effective and elusive in the same ways. Most offensively oriented fighters today seem locked into position from the waist up. Their hands aren't moving and neither are their heads. It also seems true to me that most fighters today have 2-3 combinations that they rely on over and over again. As a result they can be anticipated. Defensively, there really isn't a guy today who is reminiscent of Duran. I don't mean to say there aren't excellent defenders, just that they don't do it the way Duran did.
Go watch Duran films. It is the sport very close to it's highest incarnation.

PacMan strikes me as having some //s here. Like Duran, he's raw aggression refined, if thats not too much of an oxymoron.

In other words, he fights coming forward but gives enough movement to be elusive, in contrast to the more methodological Chavez. Punches come at all angels and the style is very Jazz-like: A lot of improvising.

Both fighters have a reputation for fury but are almost deceptively calculating. .

In light of Duran's elusiveness., Hearns really deserves a shoutout here. His jab found Duran and (the even more elusive) SRL like a radar. Arguably the finest jab in Boxing history. It was a punch in fact and at various times both fighters looked terrified.

His dismantling of Duran was the most jawdroppingly convincing defeat of an all-time great in his (near) prime since Foreman demolished Frazier. Hearns also should be credited for avenging his first loss against SRL. That jab again did the job.

Hagler was wise to just rush right in there before Tommy got full extension.

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

I sat and rewatched three Duran fights last night and, as always,Manos de Piedra opens eyes. The three fights were the second fight with Esteban de Jesus, Ray Lampkin and the first fight with Ray Leonard. The de Jesus fight is Duran very close to his absolute peak. Very, very fit at lightweight. The Lampkin fight is Duran less prepared but still excellent and the Leonard fight is him above his best weight but perhaps at his most elemental and savage. Here are some things I noticed.

1) Duran's Extraordinary Feet-It is true in all three fights, but most obvious in the de Jesus fight. Duran NEVER just stands in front of his foe. Once he lands a single shot he is suddenly somewhere else and throwing more shots. He fights in an arc around the other fighter. For example, if he lands a single shot while standing head to head, he moves, often to his right and is now opposite the foe's left shoulder where he throws a short right or a left hook and moves again! Other times he will take a short step to the left which usually means a left to the body, left to the head combination and another move. Duran's angles of attack are created by incredibly quick feet.

2) Overall Body Movement-Once Duran is in punching range, everything about him is moving. He is rolling his fists like the old timers. His upper body snaps back and forth taking his head with it. As I noted above his feet are always on the go. This amalgamation of movement is very tough to coordinate, very deceiving and difficult to counter. In the Lampkin fight, Duran's lower level of fitness means his feet aren't quite as good so his upper body movement becomes more prominent and noticeable. Jab, upper body rolls right, right hand, upper body weaves left, left hooks to the body and the head, feet move him out of the way. Not only is this approach offensively effective but they are defensively crucial as well. Duran's head is always moving and even when he is hit he is normally rolling with it.

3) Variety of Attack-In the De Jesus fight Duran is primarily a counterpuncher, in the Lampkin fight he is a stalker and in the Leonard fight he is the brawler. Even within those three styles Duran has substyles. But they share a couple of traits. Duran punches in no pattern except what works in that particular situation. Duran could throw every punch there is, in any order you ask, from any angle he found advantageous. He rarely throws a single punch or even two. If one of the first two lands? Look out, here comes the shifting angle and 2-3 more punches and then another angle change and 2-3 more. By the time he's done with a single exchange Duran has often thrown 6-7 punch combinations.
4) Excellent Defense-In some ways this is self evident. NOBODY can fight over 30 years and 100+ fights, many at a championship level, without being an exceptional defender. Guys who get hit just cannot last that long. Of course (George Chuvalo is an exception to all all rules in this regard). What drove Duran's defensive success are his offense, which usually kept people otherwise occupied, his constant upper body and head movement and his skill at grabbing, clinching, pushing etc. For the most part once he closed the distance? You were going to do what he wanted.

I realize comparing Duran to others is somewhat unfair as he is a once in a generation kind of athlete. BUT, watching him it just looks like he is competing in a different sport than most today. The second and third things I noted are what I see rarely today. Manny Pacquiao now uses his feet the way Duran did to find angles and his variety of attack is now awfully good, though that is a recent development. Joe Calzaghe's upper body movement, while of a different look that Duran's, makes him effective and elusive in the same ways. Most offensively oriented fighters today seem locked into position from the waist up. Their hands aren't moving and neither are their heads. It also seems true to me that most fighters today have 2-3 combinations that they rely on over and over again. As a result they can be anticipated. Defensively, there really isn't a guy today who is reminiscent of Duran. I don't mean to say there aren't excellent defenders, just that they don't do it the way Duran did.
Go watch Duran films. It is the sport very close to it's highest incarnation.

Great post!!

I would be really interested to know what your top ten p4p all time looks like.

Originally Posted by Manju

PacMan strikes me as having some //s here. Like Duran, he's raw aggression refined, if thats not too much of an oxymoron.

In other words, he fights coming forward but gives enough movement to be elusive, in contrast to the more methodological Chavez. Punches come at all angels and the style is very Jazz-like: A lot of improvising.

Both fighters have a reputation for fury but are almost deceptively calculating. .

There are major differences between the two. Duran's in-fighting Mastery and Pacquiao combination hand speed. Actually Pacquiao has a rhythm where he bounces with an in-and-out motion but most don't pick up on the feet because he's throwing punches. Where as Duran made changes in styles from outside to inside fighting mostly standing flat footed.

Roberto Duran is one of the most well rounded fighters in the history of the sport and probably the greatest lightweight of all time (I say probably because Benny Leonard is up there too). His mastery of various skills was what allowed him to last so long in the sport. I don't know if you could ever give him enough credit for his defense, he applied constant pressure and was able to pick off punches and counter in the tightest of spaces.

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Roberto Duran is one of the most well rounded fighters in the history of the sport and probably the greatest lightweight of all time (I say probably because Benny Leonard is up there too). His mastery of various skills was what allowed him to last so long in the sport. I don't know if you could ever give him enough credit for his defense, he applied constant pressure and was able to pick off punches and counter in the tightest of spaces.

Interestingly enough Ray Arcel who trained both said he would take Leonard as the better overall fighter than Duran. Of course this was after the no mas incident and many have speculated that Arcel said that because he was disgusted with Duran. I guess we'll never know.

Originally Posted by Manju

PacMan strikes me as having some //s here. Like Duran, he's raw aggression refined, if thats not too much of an oxymoron.

In other words, he fights coming forward but gives enough movement to be elusive, in contrast to the more methodological Chavez. Punches come at all angels and the style is very Jazz-like: A lot of improvising.

Both fighters have a reputation for fury but are almost deceptively calculating. .

he shares more with Duran than anyone I have seen since Duran. Nice call.

Originally Posted by BIG H

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

I sat and rewatched three Duran fights last night and, as always,Manos de Piedra opens eyes. The three fights were the second fight with Esteban de Jesus, Ray Lampkin and the first fight with Ray Leonard. The de Jesus fight is Duran very close to his absolute peak. Very, very fit at lightweight. The Lampkin fight is Duran less prepared but still excellent and the Leonard fight is him above his best weight but perhaps at his most elemental and savage. Here are some things I noticed.

1) Duran's Extraordinary Feet-It is true in all three fights, but most obvious in the de Jesus fight. Duran NEVER just stands in front of his foe. Once he lands a single shot he is suddenly somewhere else and throwing more shots. He fights in an arc around the other fighter. For example, if he lands a single shot while standing head to head, he moves, often to his right and is now opposite the foe's left shoulder where he throws a short right or a left hook and moves again! Other times he will take a short step to the left which usually means a left to the body, left to the head combination and another move. Duran's angles of attack are created by incredibly quick feet.

2) Overall Body Movement-Once Duran is in punching range, everything about him is moving. He is rolling his fists like the old timers. His upper body snaps back and forth taking his head with it. As I noted above his feet are always on the go. This amalgamation of movement is very tough to coordinate, very deceiving and difficult to counter. In the Lampkin fight, Duran's lower level of fitness means his feet aren't quite as good so his upper body movement becomes more prominent and noticeable. Jab, upper body rolls right, right hand, upper body weaves left, left hooks to the body and the head, feet move him out of the way. Not only is this approach offensively effective but they are defensively crucial as well. Duran's head is always moving and even when he is hit he is normally rolling with it.

3) Variety of Attack-In the De Jesus fight Duran is primarily a counterpuncher, in the Lampkin fight he is a stalker and in the Leonard fight he is the brawler. Even within those three styles Duran has substyles. But they share a couple of traits. Duran punches in no pattern except what works in that particular situation. Duran could throw every punch there is, in any order you ask, from any angle he found advantageous. He rarely throws a single punch or even two. If one of the first two lands? Look out, here comes the shifting angle and 2-3 more punches and then another angle change and 2-3 more. By the time he's done with a single exchange Duran has often thrown 6-7 punch combinations.
4) Excellent Defense-In some ways this is self evident. NOBODY can fight over 30 years and 100+ fights, many at a championship level, without being an exceptional defender. Guys who get hit just cannot last that long. Of course (George Chuvalo is an exception to all all rules in this regard). What drove Duran's defensive success are his offense, which usually kept people otherwise occupied, his constant upper body and head movement and his skill at grabbing, clinching, pushing etc. For the most part once he closed the distance? You were going to do what he wanted.

I realize comparing Duran to others is somewhat unfair as he is a once in a generation kind of athlete. BUT, watching him it just looks like he is competing in a different sport than most today. The second and third things I noted are what I see rarely today. Manny Pacquiao now uses his feet the way Duran did to find angles and his variety of attack is now awfully good, though that is a recent development. Joe Calzaghe's upper body movement, while of a different look that Duran's, makes him effective and elusive in the same ways. Most offensively oriented fighters today seem locked into position from the waist up. Their hands aren't moving and neither are their heads. It also seems true to me that most fighters today have 2-3 combinations that they rely on over and over again. As a result they can be anticipated. Defensively, there really isn't a guy today who is reminiscent of Duran. I don't mean to say there aren't excellent defenders, just that they don't do it the way Duran did.
Go watch Duran films. It is the sport very close to it's highest incarnation.

Great post!!

I would be really interested to know what your top ten p4p all time looks like.

Oh God! It is an ever changing thing. I put almost all the weight on what men actually did rather than who could beat who. Here's an attempt that will piss me off later.

Robinson
Armstrong
Greb
Ali
Louis
Pep
Langford
Benny Leonard
Duran
Charles

But I am also not gonna argue very hard if folks include Jimmy Wilde, Joe Gans, Ray Leonard, Bob Fitzsimmons, Mickey Walker.

More recent guys I'd have in the top 20 would be guys like Leonard, Jofre, Sweet Pea. Guys like Manny, Evander, Arguello, Hagler, Monzon in top 30 or so.

But like I said, I'll change my mind tomorrow.

Originally Posted by fan johnny

Originally Posted by Manju

PacMan strikes me as having some //s here. Like Duran, he's raw aggression refined, if thats not too much of an oxymoron.

In other words, he fights coming forward but gives enough movement to be elusive, in contrast to the more methodological Chavez. Punches come at all angels and the style is very Jazz-like: A lot of improvising.

Both fighters have a reputation for fury but are almost deceptively calculating. .

There are major differences between the two. Duran's in-fighting Mastery and Pacquiao combination hand speed. Actually Pacquiao has a rhythm where he bounces with an in-and-out motion but most don't pick up on the feet because he's throwing punches. Where as Duran made changes in styles from outside to inside fighting mostly standing flat footed.

I disagree, Duran was almost NEVER flat footed. It is just that his movments were more subtle than Manny's.

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Roberto Duran is one of the most well rounded fighters in the history of the sport and probably the greatest lightweight of all time (I say probably because Benny Leonard is up there too). His mastery of various skills was what allowed him to last so long in the sport. I don't know if you could ever give him enough credit for his defense, he applied constant pressure and was able to pick off punches and counter in the tightest of spaces.

Interestingly enough Ray Arcel who trained both said he would take Leonard as the better overall fighter than Duran. Of course this was after the no mas incident and many have speculated that Arcel said that because he was disgusted with Duran. I guess we'll never know.

Ray was always worth listening to wasn't he?

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

Originally Posted by BIG H

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

I sat and rewatched three Duran fights last night and, as always,Manos de Piedra opens eyes. The three fights were the second fight with Esteban de Jesus, Ray Lampkin and the first fight with Ray Leonard. The de Jesus fight is Duran very close to his absolute peak. Very, very fit at lightweight. The Lampkin fight is Duran less prepared but still excellent and the Leonard fight is him above his best weight but perhaps at his most elemental and savage. Here are some things I noticed.

1) Duran's Extraordinary Feet-It is true in all three fights, but most obvious in the de Jesus fight. Duran NEVER just stands in front of his foe. Once he lands a single shot he is suddenly somewhere else and throwing more shots. He fights in an arc around the other fighter. For example, if he lands a single shot while standing head to head, he moves, often to his right and is now opposite the foe's left shoulder where he throws a short right or a left hook and moves again! Other times he will take a short step to the left which usually means a left to the body, left to the head combination and another move. Duran's angles of attack are created by incredibly quick feet.

2) Overall Body Movement-Once Duran is in punching range, everything about him is moving. He is rolling his fists like the old timers. His upper body snaps back and forth taking his head with it. As I noted above his feet are always on the go. This amalgamation of movement is very tough to coordinate, very deceiving and difficult to counter. In the Lampkin fight, Duran's lower level of fitness means his feet aren't quite as good so his upper body movement becomes more prominent and noticeable. Jab, upper body rolls right, right hand, upper body weaves left, left hooks to the body and the head, feet move him out of the way. Not only is this approach offensively effective but they are defensively crucial as well. Duran's head is always moving and even when he is hit he is normally rolling with it.

3) Variety of Attack-In the De Jesus fight Duran is primarily a counterpuncher, in the Lampkin fight he is a stalker and in the Leonard fight he is the brawler. Even within those three styles Duran has substyles. But they share a couple of traits. Duran punches in no pattern except what works in that particular situation. Duran could throw every punch there is, in any order you ask, from any angle he found advantageous. He rarely throws a single punch or even two. If one of the first two lands? Look out, here comes the shifting angle and 2-3 more punches and then another angle change and 2-3 more. By the time he's done with a single exchange Duran has often thrown 6-7 punch combinations.
4) Excellent Defense-In some ways this is self evident. NOBODY can fight over 30 years and 100+ fights, many at a championship level, without being an exceptional defender. Guys who get hit just cannot last that long. Of course (George Chuvalo is an exception to all all rules in this regard). What drove Duran's defensive success are his offense, which usually kept people otherwise occupied, his constant upper body and head movement and his skill at grabbing, clinching, pushing etc. For the most part once he closed the distance? You were going to do what he wanted.

I realize comparing Duran to others is somewhat unfair as he is a once in a generation kind of athlete. BUT, watching him it just looks like he is competing in a different sport than most today. The second and third things I noted are what I see rarely today. Manny Pacquiao now uses his feet the way Duran did to find angles and his variety of attack is now awfully good, though that is a recent development. Joe Calzaghe's upper body movement, while of a different look that Duran's, makes him effective and elusive in the same ways. Most offensively oriented fighters today seem locked into position from the waist up. Their hands aren't moving and neither are their heads. It also seems true to me that most fighters today have 2-3 combinations that they rely on over and over again. As a result they can be anticipated. Defensively, there really isn't a guy today who is reminiscent of Duran. I don't mean to say there aren't excellent defenders, just that they don't do it the way Duran did.
Go watch Duran films. It is the sport very close to it's highest incarnation.

Great post!!

I would be really interested to know what your top ten p4p all time looks like.

Oh God! It is an ever changing thing. I put almost all the weight on what men actually did rather than who could beat who. Here's an attempt that will piss me off later.

Robinson
Armstrong
Greb
Ali
Louis
Pep
Langford
Benny Leonard
Duran
Charles

But I am also not gonna argue very hard if folks include Jimmy Wilde, Joe Gans, Ray Leonard, Bob Fitzsimmons, Mickey Walker.

More recent guys I'd have in the top 20 would be guys like Leonard, Jofre, Sweet Pea. Guys like Manny, Evander, Arguello, Hagler, Monzon in top 30 or so.

But like I said, I'll change my mind tomorrow.

My list changes constantly as well. I mean I am always finding new fihgters/fights and seeing things I never saw before.

I'd agree on a lot of your top 10. My current list, looks something like this: (Pac and PBF have just entered, at the expense of Whitaker and JCC)

1 Sugar Ray Robinson
2 Henry Armstrong
3 Willie Pepp
4 Muhammad Ali
5 Roberto Duran
6 Floyd Mayweather
7 Manny Paquiouo
8 Benny Leonard
9 Jimmy Wilde
10 Roy Jones Jnr
10 Harry Greb

Admitedly, I have seen very little of Armstrong and Leonard and base my assumptions, mainly on what I have read.

Duran punches and he connects, gets to pin the other fella’ on the ropes, trouble indeed.... He punches, he misses... he clinches and holds. Style of the era... and quite effective, wins most fights!

This attack is arguably designed to get into an infighting type of struggle, where Roberto's skills are legendary. Arguably too, is that an infighter's head functions as a third fist... always resting on the opponent's shoulder, applying a fatigue-inducing pressure, whilst all but too ready to deliver blows too when opportunity presents! Ask Mike Tyson after his fight against Evander!

....Works more successfully than it fails as a skill set, but against an excellent counter-puncher with movement and angles, this style, Roberto's, hits the wall. It fails more than it will succeed. Exhibit would be the second Ray fight.

...In the first Leonard fight, Ray's trainer, Angelo Dundee, came up with a paltry game plan, toe to toe, fire with fire, mano y mano... and Ray had to suffer a humiliating loss for it.

However, in the second fight, the adjustment made was effective enough to get the desired result. The adjustment was to counter Roberto all night with piston like shots and jabs, and to mostly avoid the ropes and the wild and furious exchanges where chins will surely be tested. It worked effective enough to frustrate Duran, and to the horror of the paying fans, to make him walk and inexplicably quit. Walking out of the fight, Duran did not allow Sugar Ray Leonard to get his just due... a redemption of some sort from winning in the traditional, hands-raised fashion.

Not too cool. Especially considering that this was a mega fight of that magnitude.

To this day, Roberto Duran cannot dismiss this single act as a non-factor that "defines", that DNA's his name, as it lines-up beside the names of the other greats. He might probably want to take that one back!

Sad that the same act has reminded most older fans of the sport as one of boxing's bad moments. Duran's worst moment is one of...
Roberto chose to quit rather than to lose to bitter rival Sugar Ray. It is way up there as to boxing's most perplexing moments. It is proper for a vanquished warrior to give his conqueror respect! This is what civility dictates, this is what men do.

Lastly, now, Roberto Duran in a boxing match against a PBF, the ultimate counter puncher... No question about the outcome, IMHO, Roberto will lose miserably, but the bigger question should be... Will he quit again?!

Originally Posted by BIG H

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

Originally Posted by BIG H

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

I sat and rewatched three Duran fights last night and, as always,Manos de Piedra opens eyes. The three fights were the second fight with Esteban de Jesus, Ray Lampkin and the first fight with Ray Leonard. The de Jesus fight is Duran very close to his absolute peak. Very, very fit at lightweight. The Lampkin fight is Duran less prepared but still excellent and the Leonard fight is him above his best weight but perhaps at his most elemental and savage. Here are some things I noticed.

1) Duran's Extraordinary Feet-It is true in all three fights, but most obvious in the de Jesus fight. Duran NEVER just stands in front of his foe. Once he lands a single shot he is suddenly somewhere else and throwing more shots. He fights in an arc around the other fighter. For example, if he lands a single shot while standing head to head, he moves, often to his right and is now opposite the foe's left shoulder where he throws a short right or a left hook and moves again! Other times he will take a short step to the left which usually means a left to the body, left to the head combination and another move. Duran's angles of attack are created by incredibly quick feet.

2) Overall Body Movement-Once Duran is in punching range, everything about him is moving. He is rolling his fists like the old timers. His upper body snaps back and forth taking his head with it. As I noted above his feet are always on the go. This amalgamation of movement is very tough to coordinate, very deceiving and difficult to counter. In the Lampkin fight, Duran's lower level of fitness means his feet aren't quite as good so his upper body movement becomes more prominent and noticeable. Jab, upper body rolls right, right hand, upper body weaves left, left hooks to the body and the head, feet move him out of the way. Not only is this approach offensively effective but they are defensively crucial as well. Duran's head is always moving and even when he is hit he is normally rolling with it.

3) Variety of Attack-In the De Jesus fight Duran is primarily a counterpuncher, in the Lampkin fight he is a stalker and in the Leonard fight he is the brawler. Even within those three styles Duran has substyles. But they share a couple of traits. Duran punches in no pattern except what works in that particular situation. Duran could throw every punch there is, in any order you ask, from any angle he found advantageous. He rarely throws a single punch or even two. If one of the first two lands? Look out, here comes the shifting angle and 2-3 more punches and then another angle change and 2-3 more. By the time he's done with a single exchange Duran has often thrown 6-7 punch combinations.
4) Excellent Defense-In some ways this is self evident. NOBODY can fight over 30 years and 100+ fights, many at a championship level, without being an exceptional defender. Guys who get hit just cannot last that long. Of course (George Chuvalo is an exception to all all rules in this regard). What drove Duran's defensive success are his offense, which usually kept people otherwise occupied, his constant upper body and head movement and his skill at grabbing, clinching, pushing etc. For the most part once he closed the distance? You were going to do what he wanted.

I realize comparing Duran to others is somewhat unfair as he is a once in a generation kind of athlete. BUT, watching him it just looks like he is competing in a different sport than most today. The second and third things I noted are what I see rarely today. Manny Pacquiao now uses his feet the way Duran did to find angles and his variety of attack is now awfully good, though that is a recent development. Joe Calzaghe's upper body movement, while of a different look that Duran's, makes him effective and elusive in the same ways. Most offensively oriented fighters today seem locked into position from the waist up. Their hands aren't moving and neither are their heads. It also seems true to me that most fighters today have 2-3 combinations that they rely on over and over again. As a result they can be anticipated. Defensively, there really isn't a guy today who is reminiscent of Duran. I don't mean to say there aren't excellent defenders, just that they don't do it the way Duran did.
Go watch Duran films. It is the sport very close to it's highest incarnation.

Great post!!

I would be really interested to know what your top ten p4p all time looks like.

Oh God! It is an ever changing thing. I put almost all the weight on what men actually did rather than who could beat who. Here's an attempt that will piss me off later.

Robinson
Armstrong
Greb
Ali
Louis
Pep
Langford
Benny Leonard
Duran
Charles

But I am also not gonna argue very hard if folks include Jimmy Wilde, Joe Gans, Ray Leonard, Bob Fitzsimmons, Mickey Walker.

More recent guys I'd have in the top 20 would be guys like Leonard, Jofre, Sweet Pea. Guys like Manny, Evander, Arguello, Hagler, Monzon in top 30 or so.

But like I said, I'll change my mind tomorrow.

My list changes constantly as well. I mean I am always finding new fihgters/fights and seeing things I never saw before.

I'd agree on a lot of your top 10. My current list, looks something like this: (Pac and PBF have just entered, at the expense of Whitaker and JCC)

1 Sugar Ray Robinson
2 Henry Armstrong
3 Willie Pepp
4 Muhammad Ali
5 Roberto Duran
6 Floyd Mayweather
7 Manny Paquiouo
8 Benny Leonard
9 Jimmy Wilde
10 Roy Jones Jnr
10 Harry Greb

Admitedly, I have seen very little of Armstrong and Leonard and base my assumptions, mainly on what I have read.

These lists are all about criteria. For example, based on records, HOFers beat, total wins, lineal championships etc if you're gonna have Manny you have to have two other men, Tony Canzoneri and Jimmy McLarnin. If you want to make it more of a product of your imagination and who you think could beat who? Then guys like Floyd and Jones can belong.

What's the "right" criteria? I hope we never find out, then what would we talk about?

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

Originally Posted by BIG H

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

Originally Posted by BIG H

Originally Posted by marbleheadmaui

I sat and rewatched three Duran fights last night and, as always,Manos de Piedra opens eyes. The three fights were the second fight with Esteban de Jesus, Ray Lampkin and the first fight with Ray Leonard. The de Jesus fight is Duran very close to his absolute peak. Very, very fit at lightweight. The Lampkin fight is Duran less prepared but still excellent and the Leonard fight is him above his best weight but perhaps at his most elemental and savage. Here are some things I noticed.

1) Duran's Extraordinary Feet-It is true in all three fights, but most obvious in the de Jesus fight. Duran NEVER just stands in front of his foe. Once he lands a single shot he is suddenly somewhere else and throwing more shots. He fights in an arc around the other fighter. For example, if he lands a single shot while standing head to head, he moves, often to his right and is now opposite the foe's left shoulder where he throws a short right or a left hook and moves again! Other times he will take a short step to the left which usually means a left to the body, left to the head combination and another move. Duran's angles of attack are created by incredibly quick feet.

2) Overall Body Movement-Once Duran is in punching range, everything about him is moving. He is rolling his fists like the old timers. His upper body snaps back and forth taking his head with it. As I noted above his feet are always on the go. This amalgamation of movement is very tough to coordinate, very deceiving and difficult to counter. In the Lampkin fight, Duran's lower level of fitness means his feet aren't quite as good so his upper body movement becomes more prominent and noticeable. Jab, upper body rolls right, right hand, upper body weaves left, left hooks to the body and the head, feet move him out of the way. Not only is this approach offensively effective but they are defensively crucial as well. Duran's head is always moving and even when he is hit he is normally rolling with it.

3) Variety of Attack-In the De Jesus fight Duran is primarily a counterpuncher, in the Lampkin fight he is a stalker and in the Leonard fight he is the brawler. Even within those three styles Duran has substyles. But they share a couple of traits. Duran punches in no pattern except what works in that particular situation. Duran could throw every punch there is, in any order you ask, from any angle he found advantageous. He rarely throws a single punch or even two. If one of the first two lands? Look out, here comes the shifting angle and 2-3 more punches and then another angle change and 2-3 more. By the time he's done with a single exchange Duran has often thrown 6-7 punch combinations.
4) Excellent Defense-In some ways this is self evident. NOBODY can fight over 30 years and 100+ fights, many at a championship level, without being an exceptional defender. Guys who get hit just cannot last that long. Of course (George Chuvalo is an exception to all all rules in this regard). What drove Duran's defensive success are his offense, which usually kept people otherwise occupied, his constant upper body and head movement and his skill at grabbing, clinching, pushing etc. For the most part once he closed the distance? You were going to do what he wanted.

I realize comparing Duran to others is somewhat unfair as he is a once in a generation kind of athlete. BUT, watching him it just looks like he is competing in a different sport than most today. The second and third things I noted are what I see rarely today. Manny Pacquiao now uses his feet the way Duran did to find angles and his variety of attack is now awfully good, though that is a recent development. Joe Calzaghe's upper body movement, while of a different look that Duran's, makes him effective and elusive in the same ways. Most offensively oriented fighters today seem locked into position from the waist up. Their hands aren't moving and neither are their heads. It also seems true to me that most fighters today have 2-3 combinations that they rely on over and over again. As a result they can be anticipated. Defensively, there really isn't a guy today who is reminiscent of Duran. I don't mean to say there aren't excellent defenders, just that they don't do it the way Duran did.
Go watch Duran films. It is the sport very close to it's highest incarnation.

Great post!!

I would be really interested to know what your top ten p4p all time looks like.

Oh God! It is an ever changing thing. I put almost all the weight on what men actually did rather than who could beat who. Here's an attempt that will piss me off later.

Robinson
Armstrong
Greb
Ali
Louis
Pep
Langford
Benny Leonard
Duran
Charles

But I am also not gonna argue very hard if folks include Jimmy Wilde, Joe Gans, Ray Leonard, Bob Fitzsimmons, Mickey Walker.

More recent guys I'd have in the top 20 would be guys like Leonard, Jofre, Sweet Pea. Guys like Manny, Evander, Arguello, Hagler, Monzon in top 30 or so.

But like I said, I'll change my mind tomorrow.

My list changes constantly as well. I mean I am always finding new fihgters/fights and seeing things I never saw before.

I'd agree on a lot of your top 10. My current list, looks something like this: (Pac and PBF have just entered, at the expense of Whitaker and JCC)

1 Sugar Ray Robinson
2 Henry Armstrong
3 Willie Pepp
4 Muhammad Ali
5 Roberto Duran
6 Floyd Mayweather
7 Manny Paquiouo
8 Benny Leonard
9 Jimmy Wilde
10 Roy Jones Jnr
10 Harry Greb

Admitedly, I have seen very little of Armstrong and Leonard and base my assumptions, mainly on what I have read.

These lists are all about criteria. For example, based on records, HOFers beat, total wins, lineal championships etc if you're gonna have Manny you have to have two other men, Tony Canzoneri and Jimmy McLarnin. If you want to make it more of a product of your imagination and who you think could beat who? Then guys like Floyd and Jones can belong.

What's the "right" criteria? I hope we never find out, then what would we talk about?

Agreed! I've started many threads regarding the difference between 'Best' and 'Greatest' e.g I think that the Bowe that beat Holyfield (I) is one of the 'Best' heavyweights of all time (meaning on that night he would've beaten most other heavyweights even on their best night) But he would get nowhere near my 'Greatest' list