Whitaker vs Duran @ lightweight

There is no question as to who would win that fight, Roberto Duran. I watched him hunt down Vilomar Fernandez for fourteen rounds while Fernandez used every trick in boxing to keep Duran from hitting him and suddenly Duran came out of nowhere and splat, down went Fernandez. People in boxing also forget that Duran was a bomber but he had superior boxing skills as Dejesus found out in bout number two with Duran. Ken Buchanan was a speedy fighter and Duran mugged him in the late rounds skill and power. I saw that one too. Pernell is a great boxer but Duran had all the skills and a punch to go with it at lightweight, Duran was also a Welterweight , Jr. middleweight and middleweight champ, no question as to who would win.

Whitaker takes it for what should be a UD but gets robbed and loses. Whitaker has never lost a fight in his prime at 135-147. And no, the farce of a decision in the 1st Ramirez fight doesn't count nor the supposed "draw" with Chavez. Even a past his prime Whitaker still won comfortably against Oscar imo. In fact I challenge anyone here to find me a clip of Whitaker's fights in his prime that he legitimately lost. You can't.

Ramirez and Chavez are not Duran Duran's training regimen alone indicated his endurance and the fact that when he moved in on his opponents, he ws not easy to hit. At lightweight most experts agree that he was awesome and he had many quality opponents throughout his career. True Whitaker was robbed in those two fights and I agree but films tell the story. I thought Buchanan was really fast because he beat another lightweight great Ismael Laguna who was the Panamanian version of Whitaker at lightweight and then cme twenty one year old Duran who evolved with every fight at lightweight and fought Esteban Dejesus in three wars of boxing slugging and technics that revealed those boxing skills he used on Leonard too.

In a 15 round title bout I think Duran would eventually cut off the ring and pummel Sweet pea and take the KO. Good matchup here though and one I've never really considered before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnsebastianmiran

Ramirez and Chavez are not Duran Duran's training regimen alone indicated his endurance and the fact that when he moved in on his opponents, he ws not easy to hit. At lightweight most experts agree that he was awesome and he had many quality opponents throughout his career. True Whitaker was robbed in those two fights and I agree but films tell the story. I thought Buchanan was really fast because he beat another lightweight great Ismael Laguna who was the Panamanian version of Whitaker at lightweight and then cme twenty one year old Duran who evolved with every fight at lightweight and fought Esteban Dejesus in three wars of boxing slugging and technics that revealed those boxing skills he used on Leonard too.

---

You're right Duran isn't a Chavez or Ramirez, but on the other hand Whitaker is no Dejesus, Buchanan, Vilomar Fernandez, or any of the other lw opponents he faced.

Duran decisively lost to Dejesus, while Whitaker did not decisively lose to Ramirez.
Whitaker's style, defensive abilities, and movement would pose serious challenges to Duran's aggressive style. Whitaker was a master at fighting off the backfoot and making his opponents miss. Therefore I take Whitaker over Duran in a mythical matchup.

Again who beat Whitaker decisively at LW or in his prime for that matter? The answer is no one did.

Coincidentally, I watched Duran/Buchanan again last night and during the fight I pictured Pernell instead of Buchanan, and what he would do in those situations.

Obviously Pernell would end up taking a lot more punches than he usually does, but I still see him out-slicking Duran.

I don't think Duran had a chance in hell of KO'ing Pernell. Duran hit like a horse but I don't feel he had the one-punch power to put Pernell down for good, and I also don't think he'd be able to land his regular accumulation on punches on Pernell to wear him down and stop him.

I just think people underrate Pernell. He wasn't feather fisted like people say he was. He was no Tommy Hearns obviously, but he wasn't a Willie Pep either.

I bet if JCC/Sweet Pea never happened, a minority of people here would pick Pernell to win, much less embarrass him like he did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnsebastianmiran

Ramirez and Chavez are not Duran Duran's training regimen alone indicated his endurance and the fact that when he moved in on his opponents, he ws not easy to hit. At lightweight most experts agree that he was awesome and he had many quality opponents throughout his career. True Whitaker was robbed in those two fights and I agree but films tell the story. I thought Buchanan was really fast because he beat another lightweight great Ismael Laguna who was the Panamanian version of Whitaker at lightweight and then cme twenty one year old Duran who evolved with every fight at lightweight and fought Esteban Dejesus in three wars of boxing slugging and technics that revealed those boxing skills he used on Leonard too.

---

Ismael Laguna was shot when he lost to Ken Buchanan, that was right at the end of his career.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Coincidentally, I watched Duran/Buchanan again last night and during the fight I pictured Pernell instead of Buchanan, and what he would do in those situations.

Obviously Pernell would end up taking a lot more punches than he usually does, but I still see him out-slicking Duran.

I don't think Duran had a chance in hell of KO'ing Pernell. Duran hit like a horse but I don't feel he had the one-punch power to put Pernell down for good, and I also don't think he'd be able to land his regular accumulation on punches on Pernell to wear him down and stop him.

I just think people underrate Pernell. He wasn't feather fisted like people say he was. He was no Tommy Hearns obviously, but he wasn't a Willie Pep either.

I bet if JCC/Sweet Pea never happened, a minority of people here would pick Pernell to win, much less embarrass him like he did.

---

Duran, for CERTAIN, had one punch KO power. He only became a volume puncher when he was up in MW, b/c that power did not carry but so well..

Duran would knock people's shoes off at LW!

You're probably right about SweetPea and JCC, but that fight was a career defining performance for SweetPea.. Without that fight he would be nothing all that special. To exist as a boxer in the 90s and be anywhere close to 140.. your ass is going to have to face JCC. And, as the (JCC's)record shows, most of these guys met their maker after getting in the ring with him.

I don't think many would argue Duran had tougher opposition, and a slightly longer career than SweetPea. It's a really hard fight to call for sure. And I would bet the scoring would be hell!

Great points by everyone...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JonnyFolds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Coincidentally, I watched Duran/Buchanan again last night and during the fight I pictured Pernell instead of Buchanan, and what he would do in those situations.

Obviously Pernell would end up taking a lot more punches than he usually does, but I still see him out-slicking Duran.

I don't think Duran had a chance in hell of KO'ing Pernell. Duran hit like a horse but I don't feel he had the one-punch power to put Pernell down for good, and I also don't think he'd be able to land his regular accumulation on punches on Pernell to wear him down and stop him.

I just think people underrate Pernell. He wasn't feather fisted like people say he was. He was no Tommy Hearns obviously, but he wasn't a Willie Pep either.

I bet if JCC/Sweet Pea never happened, a minority of people here would pick Pernell to win, much less embarrass him like he did.

---

Duran, for CERTAIN, had one punch KO power. He only became a volume puncher when he was up in MW, b/c that power did not carry but so well..

Duran would knock people's shoes off at LW!

You're probably right about SweetPea and JCC, but that fight was a career defining performance for SweetPea.. Without that fight he would be nothing all that special. To exist as a boxer in the 90s and be anywhere close to 140.. your ass is going to have to face JCC. And, as the (JCC's)record shows, most of these guys met their maker after getting in the ring with him.

I don't think many would argue Duran had tougher opposition, and a slightly longer career than SweetPea. It's a really hard fight to call for sure. And I would bet the scoring would be hell!

Great points by everyone...

---

What about his performances vs.

ODLH
Azumah Nelson
Jose Luis Ramirez
Buddy McGirt

ETC.

Thats silly thing to say in all honesty, because i could easily bring up Roberto Duran being embarrased by fighters like Kirkland Laing, Wilfred Benitez, Thomas Hearns, Robbie Simms.

No one's disputing Roberto Duran was a great Lightweight, but saying Pernell Whitaker wouldn't be that special without the JCC win is nonsense. He was rated P4P number 2 before he even fought JCC.

And he had plenty of shut out victories against very good fighters.

i think whitaker was a great, great defensive fighter but against duran, he would have been outgunned especially in a 15 rounder. and i do believe whitaker would have run all night long after he felt duran's power at lightweight, which would of swayed the judges in duran's favor because of his willingness to take the fight to whitaker.

you can make the argument that whitaker beats duran at welterweight but not at lightweight. this was duran's most effective weight and he would of dominated the "cutesy" whitaker and won by a fairly wide UD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by generalbulldog

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnsebastianmiran

Ramirez and Chavez are not Duran Duran's training regimen alone indicated his endurance and the fact that when he moved in on his opponents, he ws not easy to hit. At lightweight most experts agree that he was awesome and he had many quality opponents throughout his career. True Whitaker was robbed in those two fights and I agree but films tell the story. I thought Buchanan was really fast because he beat another lightweight great Ismael Laguna who was the Panamanian version of Whitaker at lightweight and then cme twenty one year old Duran who evolved with every fight at lightweight and fought Esteban Dejesus in three wars of boxing slugging and technics that revealed those boxing skills he used on Leonard too.

---

You're right Duran isn't a Chavez or Ramirez, but on the other hand Whitaker is no Dejesus, Buchanan, Vilomar Fernandez, or any of the other lw opponents he faced.

Duran decisively lost to Dejesus, while Whitaker did not decisively lose to Ramirez.
Whitaker's style, defensive abilities, and movement would pose serious challenges to Duran's aggressive style. Whitaker was a master at fighting off the backfoot and making his opponents miss. Therefore I take Whitaker over Duran in a mythical matchup.

Again who beat Whitaker decisively at LW or in his prime for that matter? The answer is no one did.

---

I wouldn't sell Esteban De Jesus short, in any other era he would be regarded as a great Lightweight champion of the world. De Jesus would have given Whitaker a hard fight too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JonnyFolds

Duran, for CERTAIN, had one punch KO power. He only became a volume puncher when he was up in MW, b/c that power did not carry but so well.

---

To clearify I never suggest Duran didn't have one punch KO power. I've seen enough of his fights to know Manos de Piedra (sp?) isn't a cute nickname he gave himself.

I'm just saying I don't think he has enough one punch KO power to spark Pernell. Thats no knock on Duran because like others pointed out Pernell was made of iron. Its like me saying Joe Frazier didn't have the one-punch KO power to spark Ali. Its no knock on Joe, just sayign Ali was a tough nut to crack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by milmascaras1

you can make the argument that whitaker beats duran at welterweight but not at lightweight. this was duran's most effective weight and he would of dominated the "cutesy" whitaker and won by a fairly wide UD.

---

I don't think there was a LW in history who could "dominate" Sweet Pea.

I guess I'm sounding like a Pernell nuthugger, but I just honestly think it doesn't get much better than Sweet Pea

This is a close one.

If Sweat Pea vs JCC is the model, then Pernel has the edge, since he effectively defanged Chavez. But Duran was not as methodological, ie predicatable, as JCC, was better defensively, and a tad more bloodthirsty. He was also harder to outbox.

To address Duran-Leonard II and the CV that Duran quit b/c he was being out-boxed and humiliated. If you watch the fight, Leonard wasn't really outboxing him. He was certainly using a lot of movement but Duran cunningly refused to move forward, unlike Hagler and in great contrast to Chavez (with Whitaker).

So the early rounds were close, with Duran effectively neutralizing SRLs strategy by forcing SRL to come to him. However, once he did, SRL was able to beat Duran to the punch on the inside. Then he would scooter away b/f Duran could get in a big shot.

This is really what frustrated Duran. In one round and I thnk in the beggining of another, SRL began to showboat, to use the bolo punch, stick out his neck, etc. Everyone remembers that and thinks thats why Duran quit. But if you watch the tape, SRL wasn't showboating at the time of the no mas. Rather he began to out-punch Duran and send him backwards. In essence his movement enabled his power.

so (oddly) this means I give an edge to Duran, becase sweet pea doesn't thave SRL power and if you go backwards on duran so he can't catch you, he'll just smartly stand in the midde of the ring. This will force Sweet Pea to fight more stationary, which he's very good at (like PBF was agaisnt mosely) but not good enough to beat a peak Duran, imo.

Close though.

beanflicker,

maybe i did exaggerate a bit about duran "dominating" whitaker. you're right, nobody could have done that because he was too good a defensive fighter.