Roberto Duran v. Bernard Hopkins at 160

[skyler]

Duran came up just short against Hagler. How would he fair against Hopkins?

[TitoFan]

Easy answer. Duran's peak was at lightweight, where he was unbeatable and an all-time great. Middleweight was just too much for his frame. Hopkins, as a natural middleweight, would've roughed up Duran. Not a fair comparison.

[landmine950]

I mostly agree with TITO
but as P4P i think Durans just TOO slick for bernard.
Maybe here's where I'm guilty of wearing the "rose colored glasses"
But I really like Duran.

[Taeth]

Easy answer. Duran's peak was at lightweight, where he was unbeatable and an all-time great. Middleweight was just too much for his frame. Hopkins, as a natural middleweight, would've roughed up Duran. Not a fair comparison.

I agree, and disagree. FIrst I agree that Hopkins beats Duran, and far more desively than Hagler, but I disagree that Duran was unbeatable at lightweight... one reason isthat he lost at lightweight(by ko or TKO I believe). Second I think he would had trouble with a number of fighters at lightweight including Mayweather, Mosley, ODLH, and others.

[Lords Gym]

Easy answer. Duran's peak was at lightweight, where he was unbeatable and an all-time great. Middleweight was just too much for his frame. Hopkins, as a natural middleweight, would've roughed up Duran. Not a fair comparison.

Agreed !

[El Kabong]

Duran lost to Esteban De Jesus when he was a young fighter at lightweight but at his peak he was pretty bad ass.

Duran could get ANYONE to brawl with him...I doubt Floyd would beat him....Mosely, eh, maybe he'd have a better shot than Floyd...Oscar would have a tough time with him.

Many forget Duran was not JUST a brawler he was a really good boxer...with a mean streak and some power


Hopkins would win at 160 of course....by the time Duran got up there he was fat and old.