AT 160 WHO WINS?

Duran stops him in the mid to late rounds with his boxing ability and counterpunching.Duran would have the radar to see Jackson`s shots coming enough to roll with them and take the steam out of them..while rocking back with wicked righthands...mixing in hooks and uppercuts to the body..slowly Julian would wilt.

Id take this one to the bank..Duran wins.

Jackson wins within five to seven. Duran above 147 was fairly mediocre outside of the Hagler fight.

Jackson punched even harder than Hearns. Duran will be knocked out without a doubt.

Jackson wasnt at his best at `60 either.He went life and death with Thomas Tate...got dropped and I believe that fight ended in a close decision.

Jackson had great power but that alone isnt enough to beat Duran.Thomas Hearns had wicked punching power but it was his delivery..that got Duran.Hearns was a 6-1 boxer/puncher and threw straight atom bombs from the pitcher`s mound.

Jackson on the other hand would be in Duran`s range and he didnt have Hearns blinding speed.Roberto would have his radar up and hed be reading everything Julian does.

Its clear that Jackson isnt going to take too many clean shots from Duran anyway.Duran`s the better boxer,smarter,better chin and he hit hard enough to take out Jackson no question.

No he didn't. Jackson wasn't anywhere near Hearns or Duran's league. Duran dominates and stops him in 5 or 6.

Jackson did punch harder than Hearns, although Hearns was a much better fighter. Duran would get hit and hurt at some point early on and Jackson would finish him off.

No he didn't. How many Light Heavyweights did Julian ko? Jackson was diminished from the overrated 54lb version. Jackson might catch him and hurt him and when he did Duran would fire back. Duran is too good defensively to get hit with many punches from Julian. This would be like the Davey Moore fight.

Jackson could drop him but I dont see a stoppage at all. Hearns caught Duran with successive nice one two's and had a blinding jab. IM not sure why Jackson should be compared to him.

Duran stops him at either weight.



Jackson was a world beater at 60lbs? Or better than Duran ever?

If Jackson is blind in one eye after round 1, then maybe. Otherwise, likely not.

Duran never lost to a fighter like Jackson. He loved taking on guys like that. His eye may not have closed in the first. But it would have soon enough.

How is Jackson going to do anything with him? He would toy with Julian.

Jackson could catch Duran and stop him just as LiSton could have caught Ali and Stopped him. Duran too many Skills he would toy and play with Jackson a 7th round brutal beating.

Was Duran more elusive than Herol Graham?

Yes. He didn't use his legs like Graham but Duran was one of the greatest defensive fighters whoever lived. He rolled with punches as well as anyone who has ever put on gloves.

I agree that the fight would go differently as I dont see Jackson lasting as long but I dont think having one or two eyes matters much either way in this matchup

I doubt he would toy with him. Duran certainly didn't toy with Barkley. That was a gruelling bout, and Barkley if anything was slower and more crude than Jackson. Jackson did some things well. He went to the body. He threw combos. I think he was better than you give him credit for.

It's easy to say that Jackson's slow and deliberate and very beatable, but the fact remains that in two of his big fights against top opposition, Norris and Graham, he iced both of them. Herol Graham is probably still kicking himself for letting it happen, but that's the kind of power Jackson had. Graham made one mistake, and that was enough.

I'd lean towards Jackson, but Duran could win a decision. Duran would have had an easy time with someone with Jackson's skills at 135, but not at 154 and up. Yeah, Duran would still be able to counter, but he would have to be very careful, and he'd have to pick his spots, and the impact of his shots when he did land wouldn't have the same effect.

I disagree with anyone that thinks this would have been one sided for either guy. This one would have been a battle.

Barkley was way better then Jackson as a Middleweight. The right hand Duran landed in the first round of that fight would have stopped jackson.

Barkley was easier to hit than Jackson.

Jackson got stopped by McCallum and McClellan. Two huge guys. McCallum was still good at 175, and McCellan was a huge puncher at 160.

Not sure why anyone would assume Jackson couldn't have taken Duran's best shot, and walked through it. It's certainly not like his chin was broken by anyone who couldn't really punch.

And Quincy taylor. Duran was such a pinpoint puncher and imo had as much power as McCallum. Jackson was really easy to hit and Duran consistently landed against good defensive fighters.

Even when Duran was up and down at the higher weights. He lost to boxers, not sluggers. He would eat jackson for breakfast. In shape or not.

Jackson was finished well before he ever stepped into the ring against Quincy Taylor. That's a worthless example.

It is another example of his faulty chin. So the Duran that beat Barkley or the one that hung with Hagler is outgunned by the Jackson that fought who?

Maybe if Taylor had KO'd Jackson before McClellan had stopped him twice, I would say it might mean something. I suppose Saad Muhammad had a faulty chin as well, because he was stopped by a nobody after Qawi did it twice? Once a guy has been broken a couple times, it's very rare he comes back from it, or is the same as he was before.

You aren't predicting that Duran beats Jackson. You are saying he KO's him in a one sided fight. Point to 1 fight, where Duran did that to someone at 160 that had a pulse. Just one single example.

Jackson KO'd Graham at 160. A world class fighter, who had just been edged by McCallum and Kalambay. Unfortunately during Jackson's prime, he did fight mostly stiffs, and when he fought McClellan, he was already 32, and very few all out offensive fighters are still good at that age. He fought 3 world class guys before McCellan, a young Norris, McCallum and Graham. He won 2 of 3.

Mark's raw hatred of Jackson is only balanced by his undying love for Holyfield.

I'll add this $0.02 to the conversation. I don't think Barkley is a good reference point. Yes, Iran was a good win for Duran but that's because Duran started so low. I really think Iran might be overrated at 160. I don't think he hit as hard as Jackson or was even as skilled. Over Jackson, he only had size and I think Jackson might've iced Iran if they fought.

A prime Duran beats Jackson, yes. But the gap between Duran and Jackson isn't that big at 160. Like Crold said, Duran wasn't that good at 160 and Jackson had bigger power than anyone Duran fought at that weight except for Tommy. Jackson could and would hurt Duran and Jackson carried unreal power real late in a fight. Duran wouldn't go balls to the wall against Jackson, no way.

And for it's worth, I think Terry Norris, one of Jackson's KO victims, would've executed Duran at 154, period.

Jackson is definitely underrated by Mark, in my opinion.

Barkley might be? Look, the only reason anyone ever tries to blow him up is because of his wars with two past their prime legends. He lost like a B-side to every top middle and super middle he fought. Kalambay, Benn, Toney, Nunn...you know, all the guys Duran and Hearns wanted no part of (nor should they have). Barkley isn't even one of the ten best middleweights in the post-Hagler/pre-Hopkins golden age at 160/68 (from 1987-95). Seriously...

Jones
McCallum
Nunn
Kalambay
Toney
Eubank
Benn
McClellan
Watson
Jackson...

Barkley = None of the above.

Duran wasnt the killer at `60 that he was at the lighter weights but he still could hurt you and he had knowledge.If you came to him you were playing into his hands.Jackson wouldn`t see Duran`s counters and the ones you dont see are the ones that KO you.

Could Jackson land a home run? Sure..I just dont think its that likely.

Lets remember that Julian was KOd in his prime at `54 early!besides his other KO losses at `60 some were past his best days.I dont see Jackson taking the punches that Moore, Barkely or even Hagler took.

One thing to remember is that Julian Jackson started having some serious vision problems at middleweight.His eyesight deteriorated and he got hit with shots he shouldnt have.

What would Hearns do to Jackson?


Barkely would KO Jackson at 160Lbs. inside 5 rounds.

Doc...Thomas Tate had Julian on the matt at `60 if I remember correctly.I dont have that one on film if he wasnt down he was at least hurt a # of times.Tate gave him hell.

I haven't seen the Tate fight.

Duran wasn't a puncher at 160. The only time Duran stopped anyone legit at 154 and above was Moore, and he must have hit him with a ridiculous amount of clean shots, before he did it.

Duran hit hard enough to hurt someone.Hagler showed respect for Duran`s righthand counters.Roberto did drive Barkely into the canvas like a nail.The bell basically saved Barkely in that 11th round.We know Iran took a good shot.

Maybe, or maybe Jackson would have KO'd Barkley. Iran was slower, had less technique, and was more wide open. Iran might have been able to take a better shot, but I think he's the one more likely to get nailed first. If Barkley walks into a Jackson left hook, he'd be done.

I guess its possible but Barkely took Tommy Hearns punches pretty well.Iran was also the bigger guy.

Point is Duran was able to hurt and drop a solid chinned middleweight in Barkely.I dont think James Toney was even put the Blade down at `68..later on.I think Iran Barkely was a pretty solid middleweight.

He beat Kinchen,Scypion and Hearns...and lost razor close decisions to Duran and Nunn.I think thats probably better than anything Jackson did up at 160.Plus Iran went on to win the 168Lbs title.

yeah...against the indomitable Darrin Van Horn.

Dont forget he beat Tommy Hearns again at `75..for a belt.Give the man his due.Iran Barkely was a tough,hard hitting and huge middleweight.He could be outboxed but he wasnt an easy night.

What did Julian do at Middleweight that was so impresive that Duran cant beat him? Beat Graham?..go life and death with Tate?..get blown out by McCellan twice?...

Blown out by McClellan? Life and death with tate. You;re making shit up. Tate was scored 8 and nine rounds to Jackson; the second McLClellan fight wasd a blowout but their first was named a top twenty middle title fight all-time by Ring and was turned on a vicious headbutt; not a punch. What did Duran do at 60? Lose to Barkley and get a sentimental decision...that's it. And no one said Barkley was an easy night; I just said he doesn't rate with the top ten of the post-Hagler blah blah...no shame in that. DEEP GROUP

You havent seen Tate/Jackson then....McCellan KO1 Jackson...thats not making shit up that reporting what happened.He was KOd in the first fight as well so...yeah he was blown out..

I said before Duran wasn`t a dominant fighter at middleweight but he did give Hagler a good scrap..and he beat Barkely cleanly.Jackson wouldnt of had a prayer of going the distance with Marvin.

The point still stands at 160lbs Iran Barkely has a better resume than Julian Jackson.

Barkley's record is up and down. He took Tommy's punches pretty well, but was knocked down 3 times in round 1 by Nigel Benn. The 2nd Hearns fight was also at 175, and it's hard to say what kind of pop Tommy still had at that weight, considering other than the points win over Hill, he was fighting nobodies at that time.

Duran's win over Barkley was arguably the peak of what he did above 154. A very close win over an inconsistent guy like Barkley in his best outing, doesn't mean an easy win over Jackson.

I don't take exception with any argument that says Duran wins, because I think that's possible. I just don't see it being quick, easy, or one sided, and I think Jackson is better than being given credit for. I can see Duran being careful, picking his spots, and winning a decision. I can also see Jackson doing better than Barkley did, and possibly much better if he lands something big, which is far from out of the question.




I agree, but having a better resume or being more accomplished doesn't equal being the winner of a proposed match-up. If we were to just go by accomplishments at 160, where would that leave Duran?




You are probably right that Jackson wouldn't have gone the distance with Marvin, but it's Duran's defensive skills and ability to frustrate Hager that allowed him to. Hearns didn't go the distance with Hagler either, but that didn't mean he wasn't trouble for Duran.

I believe Duran`s defense,chin and knowledge would be the difference here as well..I dont think I ever said it would be easy but I do think Duran would be in control of the flow of the fight.He would have to stay alert and not get nailed with a home run but Im pretty sure Jackson would be badly hurt at some point.I dont think hed see the finish.

As far as Duran`s resume at Middleweight...I guess it would be right there slightly above Julian Jackson`s...unless somebody can point to me the fighters he fought at that weight that were better than the fighters Duran faced.If Graham is his best win there is that really better than what Duran did?

Neither guy has a great resume.

Basically I agree with you that it isnt an easy fight.Jackson would always be dangerous even if he was falling down.Where we differ is that I think Duran can hurt Julian and change the dynamics of the fight.Jackson then would be the hunted..I dont think he could handle that.

I think that's possible, just not likely. I think the way people see this match-up has more to do with how we all rate Jackson, than anything to do with Duran. Those that prefer Jackson, think more highly of him, than those that prefer Duran do. Jackson just wanted tested enough during his prime, to avoid any opinion of him coming more down to speculation than anything else.

Exactly!!

No one should compare Jackson's Hail Marys to Hearns' calculated bombs!

How come Duran seems to have no trouble hurting Jackson but it seems like Julian can't hurt Duran? I definitely think he could hurt Duran wherever he hit him. Not KO him, but hurt him. Including to the body. That's some power he's never faced before and if he has, he didn't deal with it well. Julian Jackson hits much harder than The Blade. You need only to look at their delivery for proof.

Barkley let him Duran be in his chest all night long. Duran didn't just get in there. He was let in there because Barkley isn't that smart or good and thought it would be to his advantage as the bigger, stronger man. Jackson wouldn't let that happen.

It's a tough fight for both men. If Duran doesn't show up at 100% (which happened often), he's getting beat up.

I think Julian's resume is getting a bum rap. he would have been much better at 60, but he got dicked by politics. His eye got messed and he had contract issues with King; the WBC held him up. Then he resigns with King but cant get unification.

What was Jackson at one point? 44-0 with 42 KOs?

Ok, lets do this. How about Jackson vs. Duran at 154?

nevermind.

He was 32-0; got stopped in two by McCallum and then went on a pretty good run.

Julian's resume gets a bum rap, because he just didn't face top guys during his prime, which wasn't his fault. His best years were in his mid to late 20's, and at that time, he was destroying everyone he faced. Unfortunately, his detractors can point to the fact that nearly all of those guys were nobodies, but I feel he would have done well if he had faced better fighters during that time.

Most aggressive fighters are shadows of what they were by the time get to their early 30's. He was already 32, when the Tate fight that ETM said he struggled in took place. How many all out offensive guys are still doing much at that age? Very very few.

Saying Jackson threw Hail Mary's is stretching things. He did perhaps over commit to his shots, and certainly wasn't precise. But he did certain things well, that get results. He went to the body. He threw combos. He followed up power shots, with power shots. After throwing a right hand, he often came right back immediately with the left hook. You can call it lucky when something big lands, but when you are putting punches together, that often happens.

Obviously he wasn't Hearns, but that doesn't mean he was Mayorga.

Look, Jackson was no world beater. As you see, I don't even think he was one of the top five of his period. However, what does Duran ahng his hat on? Two fights. Hagler (nice effort), Moore (Jackson would have iced that kid too), and Barkley (who could barely hang with the best guys of his era, the sole reason he kept getting fights with guys from a preceding era). There's a reason Leonard, Hearns etc. didn't fight guys like Nunn, Kalambay and Eubak: age and economics. They could make money against each other (and an action guy like Iran) without messing with young hungry guys five/ten years younger. The one time one of them missed with a young guy, Norris made Leonard look foolish. It's not a new thing. Robinson wasn't messing with young slick faster guys in his mid-30's either. If he fought younger guys, he fought face first ones he could hang with.

Jackson at 154/60 was younger and prime; Duran was past it at both weights.

What Crold and Doc said/ have been saying.

The shot Jackson knocked Graham out with wasn't some caveman club. Nor was the right hand that separated Norris from his senses.

No, the shot on Norris was perfect. He spotted the opening and shot a gap. At 154, Jackson had some serious wins. Norris, Baek...those were class fighters. Tate wasn't great but that's a solid win too. Everyone remembers what Jones did but never consider how much damage Jackson put on him. Tate manned up and took SHOTS that fight...and could never take them again. Tate would have been hell for most 160 versions of Duran. Like someone said before, Norris would have f'd Duran up at 154 both on their best night.