i don't think Norris could beat a prime Leonard. even a totally shot Leonard stayed around till the end, and Ray often had problems with slick boxers. wasn't he about 85 in this fight (lol)? his reflexes were gone, as well as his legs.
one of vintage SRL's combinations would have cracked Norris's chin like a champagne glass dropped on concrete. he would have had a chance at greatness if he could take a punch.
Nobody said that BEFORE the fight! In fact, Ray was installed a heavy favorite & you couldnt find ONE person from the press picking Ray to LOSE
truth is, Ray went ELEVEN YEARS w/o LOSING. It's just that Ray couldnt handle fast boxers like TN & CH. He'd been given the luxury of picking badly compromised, slow, deteriorated fighters like Hagler, & lalonde (thought his eye held him back from boxing)
I think this fight really showed the extent of Ray's limitations as a fighter
Its not like Norris has the greatest defense. He has been knocked out multiple times. Just older Ray lost the speed to test the chin and the snap wasnt the same with all those layoffs. Watch young Leonard. The snap on his punches.
Davey Boy Green fight. Even when he misses you can see the snap on his shots. It was first round i think and Ray threw a Roy Jones like upercut from distance. Green blocked it but it was quick with snap
Height: Norris was 5-9 and Hearns was 6-1. Thats four inches
Jab: Because Tommy was so tall and long that was a hard shot to get away from
Power: Tommy's big right hand after the jab is why Ray was cautious
So you cant use the Hearns fight and assume Ray fights Norris the same way in 1981. Ray doesnt have to worry about height, reach, big time jab. If Ray is simply 5 steps quicker. He touches that weak chin of Norris
@Piglatinsuperstar Prime Sugar Switch to fighting and would beat down terry in a dog fight, and knock him out. Terrys Glass chin and suspect courage would break under the Prime Ray Leonard Assault like Bennitez and Hearns. Terry's no Bennitez and deffinatley no Hearns. Leonard boxed the fighters and fighted the boxers. He was a smart and clever as he was Gifted and Goodlooking. He could go from Boxing Beauty to Battering BEAST in a blink of an eye That's why he's one of the true G.O.A.T
Suspect chin? how come it was Ray on the canvas-twice? My man didnt even blink when Ray hit him point blank with his BEST combinations! U talking that shit "Terry's glass chin would break under Ray's assault"
and the Benitez fight, any1 can see that wasnt a real stoppage but MERE FABRICATION. it looked like two little boyz staring at each other cuz that's all they DID! LOL!!
let's face it, if your man was even HALF the fighter u say, he wouldve had no problems w Norris
I hope there will be another Sugar Ray Leonard a true champ not like this little bitch of Gayweather ! What he did this week against Victor Ortiz and Larry Merchant is indescriptible !! You see what sort of guy he is, I hope he will go to jail ! Gayweather is just a stupid asshole just good for beat is wife and maybe is children's ! If dlh were younger for the mayweather fight he could beat him more clearly that he did. Manny Pacquiao if you hear me : Knock this bastard out !!
The night Father Time finally caught up with Ray...To be honest he was lucky to get the verdict against Hagler...But thats another story.....Leonard was an all time great..and history has proved so was Terry!.....Ray fought two fights too many!
@Piglatinsuperstar OH PLEASE LOL! Ray was just old ,nothing more terry would go on to do nothing to distinguish himself as one the G.O.A.T He Beat up smaller older once great fighters like Ray. Taylor, Curry and Brown who KO'd him the 1st fight Was the only one to lose his title and rematch in back to back fights by DQ to a BUM! who was carried out on stretcher TWICE with title around his waist LMAO! (Whipping the Tears of Laughter from my Eyes) Terry was talented BUT MAN! Was he was Terrible.
I'm sorry but Ray was installed the heavy favorite to win this fight. The reason he didnt is becuz of an inability to handle blazing hand & foot speed. Ray had never faced a man possessing a combination of ring smarts, excellent mobiblity, speed, and who could box, bang N move.
and let's not forget which man had the superior chin: Norris. Which is why Terry stood up to Ray's best shots but ray couldnt stand up to Terry's
@Piglatinsuperstar That was an old Leonard. You have a point. Leonard was not unbeatable in his prime, though. So maybe Terry might have had a shot at some point. There were a lot of great fighters at Ray's time. I agree he fought two fights too many. Ray would have beaten Camacho as well.
@Piglatinsuperstar Maybe your memory is better than mine, Piglatin. How was Terry's chin? Could he have taken the best from Hearns, Hagler, Duran in their prime?
@Piglatinsuperstar Ha we're talking about prime. Terry was no stranger to the canvas later in his career, either. I just don't think he could have dealt with Hagler or Hearns - Sugar maybe. Was Terry primarily a welter or jr middleweight?
@Piglatinsuperstar Ray couldn't EVER handle Norris? You're trippin buddy. Sure, you might think it's a bad matchup for Ray. But remember, all three of those examples you gave (Hagler, Hearns, Duran 2), Ray was the dog. Hagler was unbeatable at the time. Hearns was a scary beast. And Duran had already gave it to Ray the 1st fight... RAY FOUND A WAY. Chances are he does the same vs. Norris. Whether he gets in his head, etc. One thing we know: Ray Leonard is a true champion. He would've taken Terry
@JoeyPencils What's your point? SRL was coming off a five-year layoff, and was not in his prime anyway either. Whether YOU think he lost, he fought a competitve enough fight to have won the decision.
In Rays prime he would have out classed Norris! Ray had far more tools than Norris ever possessed as a fighter.The only thing that Norris had over Ray was strength.But strength doesn't when fights against A Class Competition.
I said "In Ray's prime". And also Ray was 35 in this fight and had approximately 1 fight per year since 1981.
In Ray's prime he was an over all better boxer than Norris.His hands were just as fast,Threw more fluent combinations,displayed great ability to come back when in trouble,great heart,could box or stalk.I can tell you this,Norris would not have been able to survive with Duran or Hearns at 147. Norris lacked the versatility.
let's set the record straight: SRL had never accomplished as much as he had until he met Norris. At that point, he had won 5 world titles, beaten Hagler, and now here he was facing Norris w/o the ring rust that had plagued him going into the Hagler fight. what's more, he'd gone 11 yrs w/o a loss. His experience was legendary & shouldve won w/o working up a sweat. he wouldve won if not for the speed of norris.Sugar couldnt adjust like he could with the slower fighters
I question your knowledge of the sport based on this.I stated previously that from 81-91 Ray had approximately 1 fight per year.Between 84-87 he was inactive with 1 fight in 84 and 1 fight in 87.In 1991 the man was 35 yrs old.That is old for an athlete.You are not as fast and don't have the reflexes or stamina that once was.
Norris turned pro in 87.(within 5 yrs) By 91 when he faced Ray,Norris had 29 fights at 24 yrs old. He had every advantage.
yeah but you're trying to use averages when in fact, most of those were between 82-87 and Ray had been far more busy going into the Norris fight. Ring rust was not the factor it had been like it had for Hagler. If anything, Ray shouldve been much sharper against Norris. The actual problem was Norris' speed. Rayhad never encountered anything close to it anywhere
ray also has the style that doesnt match up well w a mover like Norris. All his opponents are slow, stiff
It's hard to quit your job when you can make a at least a few million every night that you go out.They are fighters and this is how they earn a living.
Terry Norris was a good athlete.He was very strong,Fast & threw crisp,strong combinations.But had a questionable chin.Do you really think that Norris would have did anything impressive against Duran,Hearns or Hagler at 154? With a questionable beard & a lack of versatility he would not have gotten passed either of them.
Ray's other problem is that he takes too long to look for openings whilst Norris simply unloads while he's probling. Norris is trigger fisted which doesnt allow for Sugar the time he'd like to exploit those openings. So instead he has to worry about defending his chin
speaking of chins, I recall it was Norris who tooks Ray's best w/o so much as blinking. I dont recall Leonard being able to take Terry's w/o feeling the effects. Terry had Ray down twice
I will say this about Norris.From his devastating KO Loss to Julian Jackson in 1989.He went on to accumulate 15 straight wins before losing to another World Class fighter from my home town Simon Brown.To pick up the pieces and re focus the way that he did said a great,great deal about him.
@Piglatinsuperstar Maybe your memory is better than mine, Piglatin. How was Terry's chin? Could he have taken the best shots from Hearns, Hagler, Duran in their prime?
its sad to watch this, i hate when boxer's stay on to long in the sport till their skills are diminished and they look like literally a shadow of their former selves to opponents who wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes with them in their prime
@hunnuit Wrong. While a young Leonard would have had a better than 50/50 chance of beating Terry, he would never have had an easy time with a guy like Terry. The number of people he faced that were as talented as Terry you could count in one hand. Terry was the bigger man, could take Leonard's punch better than Leonard could take his. He was almost as fast as prime Leonard, had boxing skills to match. Had an unpredictable pace and rythmn, stuck between aggressive puncher and classic boxer.
@hunnuit Basically Terry Norris was the kind of guy who would have given Leonard hell at any point in his career. Against an aging Leonard it was one sided, against a young Leonard it would have been war.
@allankles - I agree that Norris was good,but don't forget about Leonard in his prime. There was no way that Norris could've beaten Leonard. Go look at his past highlights. he was cat quick,he hit for power every punch, and if he went the distance with Norris washed up,imagine what might've happen back in 81. he would've murdered Norris.
Norris wouldve whipped Ray any time any place. leonard simply could not prepare for the speed. Ray never fought anyone w TN's speed. leonard only lost a slight step for this fight and was dominant over Duran (world middleweight champ)
@Piglatinsuperstar You have absolutely have lost your mind if you you say that Norris had more hand speed than a Leonard in his prime ,you crazy. Go watch film and then we can talk.
Ray had alot of speed, almost as much as Terry but he was too hesitant sometimes taking too long to look for the right opening whereas Terry would just drill someone. Terry was trigger-fisted. you couldnt stop him once he got going
@eddiecopelyn While Leonanrd in his prime was quicker handed the only guy he fought with the kind of handspeed Norris had was probably Hearns. And Norris was faster than Hearns in terms of varied combination punching. So all in all, ironically Norris was one of the top 3 or 2 most gifted boxers Leonard had ever fought. Unfortunately for him, he fought him in his twilight.
Legands die hard, Ray in his prime would have beten Norris with no problem; but in this fight Sugar Ray is shown that he is just a shadow of his old self. And this fight was also like Ali vs Holmes. A sad way for a legend to go out, but you hav eto know when you time is up.
you lie! leonard could NEVER beat Norris. If they fouught ten times Norris would beat him every time. Norris had too much speed and Leonard had never faced anyone with his level of speed
Which part of this ass whipping gives u the impression Ray could possible do well with Terry? Even tho Ray had a huge edge in experience and went 11 w/o a loss, he was no match for the young speedster/phenom! Norris was slick, quick, and made Ray Leonard sick!
you're going to have to justify that statement "Leonard would own this guy". What part of their fight gave you THAT impression? Leonard has never done well with fighters that had speed
being 34 is no excuse. he only had 35 fights. compare that with Monzon who had well over 100 fights and still going strong at 35 on top of his division. In leonard's previous fight the year before he owned Duran, dominating with flurries, hand speed & lateral movement but couldnt do it with TN!
@Piglatinsuperstar I agree 34 isn't that old, but you don't know boxing at all if you can't see Leonard is WAY past his prime. He was never the same after coming back, even against Hagler he looked horrible (so did Hagler).
Now, I'm going to tell you what to look for. Young Ray Leonard had possibly the best left hook boxing as seen, this Ray Leonard has no left hook. Watch it against Duran or Hearns I, watch it here.
he really wasnt. in his last fight against Duran Ray won every round easy, his legs in perfect order, the combinations as fast as furious and as effortless as ever.
Norris exposed Ray's weakness which was the difficulty with dealing with fast mobile slicksters. Especially a slickster like Norris that could bang box and move so Leonard wasnt able to land his left hook cuz Norris would never stand still for him. so forget all this BS you see from people like stubaru. he's dreaming
@Piglatinsuperstar It's got nothing to do with Norris. Leonard had fought, and beaten faster fighters than Norris before. Hearns was a far more difficult fighter.
Watch how wide and slow Leonard's left was. His own lawyer said after he saw him throw a hook in this fight, it was all over for him. He also looks very weak.
He did drugs, and aged really badly. Watch the Hagler fight too. Both looked horrible, just Hagler was worse. Against Hearn II, watch how slow they both are.
None as fast as Norris. Hearns had a better right hand but not as well balanced a fighter as TN, who had better stamina, all around speed, & defense, and much faster on his feet. Hagler was shot. Duran was a lightweight and benitez, I never thought much of him anyways.
Leonard wasnt really slow and thanks to Hagler's slowness fought the best fight of his career. norris, he just made him LOOK slow. Ray wasnt used to the speed even when Ray was active he wouldnt fight anyone fast
@Piglatinsuperstar Hearns was faster than Norris, and a much better fighter. There's no comparison there. He had reach, height, power, and strangely for Hearns, a better chin. Leonard was shot against Hagler.
Watch Leonard against Mayweather. Benitez was fast too. Hearns, very fast. How about the Andy Price? Very fast, and you'll never see a better combination thrown by a fighter in your life than Ray Leonard's.
Norris was on the level of Benitez. Good, but not great.
got to dissagree with you. Hearns was also lacking on defense. he was just a tall guy with a basic stick and move strategy that mostly worked on Leonard until he ran out of gas
to give credit tho, the attack from leonard in rds 6,7 probably had something to do with it as well as Tommy's weight of 145, partly Tommy's fault, partly Leonard's
Norris was better all around fighter on defense w lightning left hook/uppercut SRL had no defense against
@Piglatinsuperstar Hearns was not a stick and move fighter, he looked best moving forward. Leonard made him back up. The weight is nonsense, he had fantastic stamina that fight, better than Leonard. Look at the movement and number of punches he threw.
Norris was not nearly as fast as a young Leonard, and not even as quick as Hearns, and had the weakest chin seen, and only good (not great like Hearns) power.
benitez was actually slow. Norris had what Benitez lacked: speed and also offense minded attack that he revved up as we saw against Leonard
price he was a joke having lost 4 times between 1976 & 1979
Hearns didnt become great till 3 yrs after the leonard fight similar to Joe Louis two years after the 1st loss
having bulked up he seemed much faster, didnt bruise as easy and greatly improved going into the Hagler fight. I remember those days well. he was almost invincible
@Piglatinsuperstar Hearns was seen as invincible before Leonard, and in fact was the 7-5 favorite. He was his best at 147, where he was extremely tall, had a HUGE punch, huge reach, and his chin was still OK. At 154 and especially 160, he was much more vulnerable. All of his advantages were lessened, although he was still excellent at 154.
thats Hollywood buildup. that's what the media does. i believe Leonard was 6-5 fave. not much was known about Hearns other than his KO of Cuevas. hadnt really face anyone outside of Pipino and would be several years before peaking
dont think youre going to find many people agreeing that Tommy had peaked going after just three years. too thin & undeveloped until moving up to 154 where after 4 more years put on much needed muscle and appeared much stronger & fit
@Piglatinsuperstar Actually, you can look at the SI article. Hearns was 7-5 favorite . Everyone knew of Hearns, how is someone favored over Leonard and not known? He had a huge knockout ratio, was never beaten, and destroyed everyone. He was like Tyson, but with a higher knockout ratio, and was tall and with reach. No one heard of it.
Always remember, everything is relative. 154 pounders are bigger, taller, stronger with more reach. So, compare Hearns relative to opponents.
oddsmakers had is 6-5 SRL. I went with Ray also. Hearns only had the Cuevas fight and I felt he was mostly an unknown quantity even tho he did have unusual height and reach. At the same time I didnt feel Tommy was as well balanced a fighter as Leonard, nor did I feel his experience could match Ray's. Nor did he Angelo Dundee as his trainer who I felt was superior to Manny St. Nor did I feel he had Leonard's mental toughness. Leonard was tougher. By '84 that had completely reversed
@Piglatinsuperstar From SI "At the end of the 12th round in their first bout, Hearns, who was a 7-5 favorite, was leading grandly, if somewhat insanely, on all three judges' cards."
No one ever entering the ring was as well balanced as Leonard, but Hearns had BIG advantages in height, reach, and power. On top of that, he was almost as quick, had crazy heart, and great stamina that fight. He was a nightmare. That fight had more talent/skill than any other.
ok but who's EVERYONE? Most were ready to be knocked off and had sported several knockout losses such as broken down in it for his last payday Angel Espada
is everyone Jim Richards? Jose Figueroa? Randy Shields? 6 years past his prime Clyde Gray? Pablo Baez with his emergency last minute top ten ranking so he could get the fight sanctioned by the WBA?
@Piglatinsuperstar Look at his fights outside of the welterweight division after that. Worse names, with worse results. Shields was a pretty good fighter. Cuevas a good fighter. Bruce Curry was decent. Luis Primera undefeated. Not great like the guys Leonard beat, but, considering how he beat these guys, still impressive. Who did Norris beat in his prime? A shot ex-great fighter, and overblown lightweight. Plus, all the knockout losses.
actually the results got better; an easy win over 3 time champ Benitez, some sturdy trial horses, Minchillo, Sutherland, Singletary which helped his endurance a lot. after which he began peaking. A frightening Ko over Duran & Hutchins, Hearns had never looked better and improved dramitically as one would expect
as for the others are u kidding? Primera, all those guys no one knew where they were coming from. Shields posed no threat whatsoever
@Piglatinsuperstar Did you say Benitez wasn't very good? Sturdy trial horses? They were the same type of fighter you criticize. Duran was a blown up lightweight, remember? And this was WAY past his prime, after Leonard castrated him.
Shields was at least as good as most of those guys you call trial horses. Benitez truly was a very good fighter, but style wise, Hearns was a nightmare. Well, that's true for almost anyone fighting Hearns.
Benitez was ok but his offense was lacking. not much fire or will to win in tough fights the way Terry had. Terry wouldve put the pressure on if he found himself falling behind
Terry had a lot more energy and nerve then Wilfred who, was only a defensive fighter. takes more than a good defense to win the important fights
the trial horses I was talking about were the guys Tommy started fighting after he moved up: McKraken, etc. They helped Tommy build his endurance & develop
Hagler started peaking around mid 1977 and then rebouded to another peak frighteningly high in 1981 by my est. You dont see fighters fighting at this level of supremacy ever. the last time was in Robinson 1950-51 then he began fading and losing
Tommy peaked around the same age as hagler-25. He got so good he did away with guys like Duran, snuffing them ridiculously easy
I just got a eye for these things. who esle you want to know about?
@Piglatinsuperstar You don't have any eye for it, if you think Leonard was in his prime when he fought Norris. In fact, I'd say you're probably worse at this than anyone if you believe that. He was completely shot by then, and was already badly faded when he fought Hagler. Hagler was even worse.
Leonard's best fight was probably Duran II, when he was incredibly sharp. Hearns physically was best at 147, but he had holes (didn't know how to fight hurt). Above 147, his chin was a problem.
i in fact do. Ray had just pitched a shutout over Duran winning every round and did it by boxing & moving. You cant be shot and still box & move like that! Its very hard to say he had nothing left as you claim after a performance like that. Remember SRL had little wear on his body due to the short # of fights
the Hagler fight was his best even tho hags was shot. Ray got a little tired but this is nothing unusual for him (he had trouble keeping up with Duran in the 1st fight)
@Piglatinsuperstar Actually, if you knew anything about what you're talking, you'd realize that Leonard won the last three rounds of Duran I on the scorecards, and gave Duran a beating in the 14th, and Duran basically didn't even fight the 15th.
Leonard did drugs, and his body never recovered. He looked like crap against Hagler. Hagler was totally shot. Can you imagine prime Leonard against someone that slow?
You use a fight almost a year and a half, against a 38 year old, as proof?
I dont know about the last 3 rds. I think your description is a real stretch. he did win some of the rounds as Duran eased off the gas. but this shows that Leonard did tire. all his fans act as tho he never tired and obviously he did becuz he had problems keeping pace with Duran
in fact you cant really show me one major fight where Leonard dominated his opponent outside of the passive Benitez. Tommy Hearns was wayyyy ahead and Duran 2, Roberto basically dropped 40 lbs for the ft
@Piglatinsuperstar It's not debatable, it's a fact. Leonard won the 13th round on 2 out of 3 scorecards, and won the 14th and 15th on all scorecards. He couldn't keep up? Duran took an unwholesome beating the 14th, and was so beaten by then, he had nothing for the 15th.
You make the least sense of anyone here. A fight Leonard came on strong late is a fight you use to say he couldn't keep pace. Have you ever watched the fight?
that's why Leonard didn take the fight w Hagler earlier. he was just waiting to get to the sloppy leftovers. he couldve taken it in 82 or 83 or 84. He was fighting wasnt he? A guy named Kevin Howard. so no one can really use that lame excuse "he was out becuz of his eye". I never believed the eye story anyways. especially the way he kept fighting in the late 80s, one guy after antnother. on top of that he discards the thumbless gloves beginning w Lalonde
@Piglatinsuperstar Again, you are being illogical. Howard was after his layoff, and he knew he needed some fights to get tip top. He also knew Hagler was a shot fighter when he fought him. Coming off the layoff, he would never have fought Hagler at his prime, but he saw he was very slow by that time.
The reality is, neither fighter was the same. Both were well past their prime, and that's why the fight was close. Same with Hearns/Leonard II.
@Piglatinsuperstar Duran was 38 years old, and Duran never could fight anyone that moved, even in his prime. Leonard embarrassed him their second fight because of that.
You are the only one that thinks Leonard was in his prime when he fought Norris and Camacho, and frankly, you're often wrong, and use a fight where one guys wins the last three rounds as an example of him tiring badly. There's something not working in your head. Norris past prime 31, Leonard prime 40? Weird.
@Piglatinsuperstar Hearns had great endurance against Leonard. Don't forget, that night it was HOT in the ring, really hot. Hearns threw more punches than Leonard by a long shot, and moved most of the last part of the fight. Leonard was tired more of the fight, and after moving too much early, really took a lot of time off.
Hearns had the weak chin, and body, and that became more of a liability as he moved up in weight. It's a lot easier to take a punch from a 147 pounder than 154.
the question should be who DIDNT Norris beat in his prime. its like a whos-who of hall of fame. Starched Mugabi in 1. Leonard probably wished he had never taken the fight, Brown, Curry and the fastest fighter ever Meldrick Taylor
@Piglatinsuperstar Taylor was WAY too small. Leonard was a shadow of himself. Brown was a scrub, who managed to knock Norris out, and nearly put him out with a jab.
Who didn't he beat? Julian Jackson? McCallum? Hearns? He was the master of beating undersized and overaged fighters. Curry was shot by the time they fought.
Did you know Norris retired at 31, which, by your definition is well into his prime. Why did Lourent Boudouani beat him? Rene Jacquot? Dana Rosenblatt?
no he wasnt. If you say that then you have to ask yourself what was Duran doing fighting Sugar Ray Leonard
Both Meldrick and Duran came up from 135 and took a portion of the welterweight title. Terry even dropped weight and came down to 149 to make it easier!
But Terry was still supreme that nite. Only HE had the right stuff to effectively deal with the incredible speed of Meldrick that left Chavez confused, baffled,a dn oft times utterly humiliated and gun shy
@Piglatinsuperstar But, I can help you wade through your misconceptions and confusion. Duran had been fighting above 140 (meaning welterweight) for two years before he fought Leonard. Taylor had to move up in weight, and at any rate was never the fighter Duran was. He got hit too easily, and was the worst style for Norris. I remember when they made that fight I was wondering how Taylor even had a chance, it was stylististic nightmare. He had no punch either.
Duran had 6 fights above 135 before meeting Leonard. Taylor had at least a few including defenses of his welterweight title before meeting Norris two years later, the same stretch of time before Duran met Leonard
why dont we compare Taylor's age to Duran's age when they had their showdowns. Taylor: 25 to Duran's 29
let's not try to turn Norris-Taylor into a suddenly percieved mismatch
@Piglatinsuperstar Duran had been fighting at Welterweight for a few years, Taylor was not a superwelterweight. But, more than that, style wise, Taylor had no chance at all. It was all wrong for him. Let's be real, Taylor was not a great fighter, and got hit constantly in every fight. Being short, and having to get in, and with no real defense, he was easy meat for a guy much bigger, who hit much harder. He was probably a better fighter than Norris, but styles make fights.
Dec 78 - June 1980 is a few years? Taylor had been defending his crown for a year and half so is even more suited for the welterweight division than Duran who spent 11 yrs at 135
also, you failed to say why Norris was wrong for Taylor. Everyone gets hit and the fact is, even in the Chavez fight Taylor would do most of the hitting, thats why he was essentially unbeaten (Ref Steele robbed Melrick of his rightful victory)
Mel outhit Chavez at least 12-1 thats why he was so ahead
@Piglatinsuperstar Duran fought at 150 pounds (above welter) 9-1-1978. Did you forget that?
Taylor had essentially no defense, he was not a guy that tried to make you miss, he just fired back and hit you more. On top of this, he had no punching power, although he did hurt Norris with a body shot a bit. Against someone a lot bigger, with much more reach, who hit much harder, he had no chance. It was a complete mismatch because of their styles.
first of all that's false. It was Norris that hurt Taylor with the body shots. It was Taylor's legs that buckled from body shots in the same way Leonard's legs buckled from Terry's right hand to the body.
Norris never buckled in the Taylor fight. and to say that Taylor had no defense is laughable. He is a student of Lou Duva and the reason he seems not to bother with defesne is becuz Meldrick does all the pitching. Ask JC Chavez
@Piglatinsuperstar Norris did hurt Taylor with body shots too, but Taylor hurt him a bit, and also stunned him with a right to the head. Norris had that glass jaw, after all.
Taylor had terrible defense, and got hit repeatedly by Chavez. He also had very short arms, which made it difficult to get in with Norris. Also, the fight was called too soon, Taylor was fine.
if what youre saying is true then why did Chavez have so much trouble with Taylor?
Personally I think Meldrick woudve given Leonard hell, alot more problems that he gave to Terry.
Terry know how to handle speed. he wasnt afraid to meet someone like that head on and engage them immediately. Leonard wasnt so anxious to start off fast the way Norris would or Hagler
as for Duran, youre only talking a couple of months. Taylor had been fighting on the championship level 2 yrs
I still cant believe all the problems Kevin gave to Sugard, a guy much smaller & physically weaker backing up the larger man, giving him all he could handle, then retiring him. he retired Leonard for 3 years! Kevin really gave him headaches, enough to want to forget all about the game
I think a guy like Meldrick wouldve flurried Ray into a points defeat
and Norris? He wouldve given him another butt whuppin, same as he did when they fought. u just cant make a case for him winning
@Piglatinsuperstar Chavez was small, didn't have good reach, and wasn't very fast. Taylor didn't have to get inside his reach, and Chavez was not 150 pounds. Leonard was much faster than Norris, and would have pitched a shutout against Taylor, but, I don't think he would have knocked him out as earlier. I think Taylor would have either lasted the fight, or been stopped on cuts or something.
Norris only had one edge over Leonard, he did hit harder.
I dont know of anyone but you that has said Meldrick had no chance. you made it up. you make up a lot of stuff. for instance "leonard was a lot faster than Norris"
Oh really? Then why did he have so many problems putting Howard away? Putting Kalule away? Putting Bonds away?
Someone like Taylor would give Ray Leonard fits. Leonard doesnt have what it takes to compete with a lightning trigger fisted fighter like Norris or Taylor. In fact, he passed up Nunn for that very reason
@Piglatinsuperstar A lot of people before that fight felt Taylor was in decline, and was style wise a big problem.
Kalule had never been knocked down, and was a jump up in weight. Leonard knocking him out was a big surprise.
Howard was slow, and that was after his comeback.
The last time Bonds had been knocked out was 7 years earlier, and Leonard hurt him constantly. He was also a southpaw, which Leonard never really liked.
no it wasnt. Kalule wasnt even known outside of Europe so how could the KD be a surprise?
Kalule was the black version of Dave Green-slow, immobile, no punch, no speed, no jab, and came straight at you
and the jump you speak of isnt the same kind of jump Roberto Duran had to make for Leonard
Which is the bigger challenge: moving up from 135 up 20 pounds to beat a guy like Leonard or moving up from 147 FIVE pounds for someone like Kalule. everyone knew he would lose
@Piglatinsuperstar Leonard was clearly the favorite, but no one knew Kalule would be knocked out. He had never been down. Bonds had also never really been knocked out (his KO loss was from cuts), and had only been down once. Going up 7 pounds and fighting a guy who had never lost, or been down, who was champ, and knocking him out is very impressive.
Duran went up 11 pounds, not 20, and had been fighting welter for two years. Leonard actually went up to fight Kalule.
and you know this how? Did you take a poll? There was no poll so how would you know?
please stop trying to make Kalule and Bonds out as some indestructible bad asses with Leonard being so great that he toppled these two non entities. Kalule and Bonds were NOTHING! The feeling among fans, crtitcs was how Bonds managed to last 11 rounds and that the tko of Kalule was no big deal
Slow, clumsy, no movement, no punch, no speed. Just a walking punching bag
@Piglatinsuperstar Watch the fight, and even the commentators say how difficult it is to knock out Kalule, and how sturdy he is.
Reality is, he never got knocked down before that fight, and Bonds got knocked down once, and only stopped on cuts. Leonard stopped both, Kalule after moving up a weight class.
That's pretty impressive for a guy that's not known for being a puncher.
Do you think Norris would have been able to go 15 rounds against Duran?
@Piglatinsuperstar Norris might have been knocked out by either, since he had the weakest of chins.
He did hit harder than Leonard though, I'll give you that. But the problem is, he had such a soft chin, if he got hit, he'd go down.
Hagler Hearns was a nothing knockout, Hearns was simply tired. Obel? Who cares? How about Leonard/Green. Marciano/Walcott? Leonard's knockout of Andy Price was the most impressive I have ever seen. Unreal combination that no one else could throw.
its like I said, youre just fabricating cuz nothing you say ever turns out to be true!
For instance, you say Terry had the weakest of chins but in reality it was Ray leonard that had the weakest of chins cuz Terry dont even FEEL his shots even at point blank range rds, 1 ,2, 11. you keep taling about how Terry had a weak chin. I dont see Terry buckle from Ray's shots. So what you have to say is that since Terry is putting Ray on the floor, that it's really Sugar cant take a shot
1st of all, Price had 4 losses in the last 2 years prior to meeting Sugar so he was just an overhyped pretender and it showed. what a laugh! The TV Execs couldnt even figure out how to build up Price as a serious challenge
Obel on the other hand was his 2nd time around as leading WBA contender (like Hamsho) and better the second time around (never lost like Green or Price)
Obel had actually improved by around 40%! But here's the thing, SO DID Hagler!!! ergo, Hagler KO 5 Obel
@Piglatinsuperstar You're thinking is very disjointed. Watch that combination. It's the best I've ever seen. Price was a pretty good fighter, that's it, but that's not the point. The combination was spectacular. Timber Terry could never have thrown it.
It's okay except that Price was what I call a non entity. that is, he was a fighter without marquee value. Check the record
Hagler's tko over Obel remains in my mind the CLASSIC knockout who had improved at least 40 % over the 1st time since he met Hagler. He went 8 the 1st time but only 5 the second time. No one stood a chance against Marvin then. Everyone was afraid of him. Hearns pulled out that year not once but TWICE.
then Leonard who THOUGHT he had the guts & skills to beat him, called Hagler into Baltimore C. Center Nov 82, began hyping a fight between them. then quickly did an abrupt about face by the very next sentence!
I knew Sugar didnt have the right stuff to take the fight becuz he wasnt that caliber of fighter to take on so dominant a fighter. While Hearns had been knocking over tomato cans, Ray knew that hagler had been knocking over the top fighters coming up with the ranking of #1 contenders
@Piglatinsuperstar I like Hagler a lot, but, he would have had a very difficult time against prime Leonard. Leonard had ungodly talent, and was the most complete fighter to enter the ring. Hagler was a tough, skilled fighter, but his level of talent was simply not there. He had size though, and long arms, but, style wise, it would have been the worst type of fight for Hagler.
I have nothing but respect for Hagler, but, Leonard in his prime would have been a nightmare for him. Bad style.
If that were true Sugar wouldve proved it by facing Hagler & beating him. The fact that he didnt says a lot so one can only conclude it wouldve been a easy blowout for Hagler. Hagler was too versatile anyways and no one wanted to see Ray get hurt
and while talent is nice to have, its the ability to hurt and take the other guy out of the game, that counts. See Norris-SRL for proof. Sugar, probably the better fighter ON PAPER, got slapped down rd and felt his guts turn to jelly
talking talent, let's compare: Jab goes to hagler (put 55 sticthes in Hamsho's face with it. Tore a hole in Sibson face and hastened his downfall the very next round, snapped Hearn's head with it)
Chin goes to Hagler in a landslide. Boxing ability: Hagler. Ray fell way behind in the Hearns fight,, not impressed. The following month, hagler dominated Hamsho, making Sugar Ray resemble a piker by comparison. Footwork also hagler. Combinations: Leonard. Defense: Hagler: everything else; Hagler
@Piglatinsuperstar Leonard had a better jab, left hook, straight right, uppercut, footwork etc... Leonard never got knocked down in his prime. Defense wasn't close, Leonard by a landslide.
Leonard had too much speed for Hagler. Hagler was the bigger fighter though, and had better reach. But, he was giving so much away in talent, as tough as he was, I think it's just the worst fight for him style wise. Styles make fights.
how can he have a better jab than Marvin Hagler's? Hagler put 55 stitches in Hamsho's face and several more in Sibson. Whose face did Leonard's jab ever rip apart?
you're just making flase claims that dont exist. that's the thing about Leonard's fans; they always fabricate becuz there's so little to his accomplishments. Hagler's right hook was also superior, no doubt. hagler could fight equally well as both the agressor or on the backfoot, Leonard couldnt
Hagler's chin-WAY freaking better. Leonard actually got hurt by Geraldo in an over the waight match
Watch leonard trying to chase Hearns down in fight one. he doesnt even know what he's doing! He's obviously making it up as he goes along. While hagler was by far more effective in bringing down the same Hearns (better version tho)
that's 3 rds vs 14!
then again the only OTHER time Ray was forced to cope with a slick boxer (Norris),, his luck ran out and couldnt solve him in time
@Piglatinsuperstar Hagler almost got stopped by a past his prime Hearns. But, he had a better style for Hearns than Leonard.
Watch Leonard in the rounds he threw punches. He beat Hearns pretty easily. That right in the 13th was a punch of beauty, so was the double hook that ended the fight.
not from where I sat. hagler took the first then the second then took him out 1:48 rd three whereas it took Leonard 14 long rounds, most of which he looked clueless in trying to figure out how to corner Tommy. he was basically just throwing haymakers.
that last joke of yours "there's just a lvel of talent Hagler didnt have" is hilarious when you consider it took hagler 3 rds to Leonard's 14. I guess in your book, less is more eh?
it would be a lot different had Ray also whipped Pryor, then Curry. THAT would impress me! but what did he really do? There's so little. you cant even say he beat Norris. that would help a little
meanwhile hagler won twice as many bouts as leonard and was never stopped. Leonard was dropped all the time
@Piglatinsuperstar Leonard was never knocked down in his prime, only after he came back. He was never the same fighter after that.
Pryor was too small to even be competitive. Curry came after Leonard had retired. Hearns was far better than both, and so was Duran. Pryor would have been killed by Leonard or Hearns, he was just too small.
27 is not his prime? Not only that but the opponent that floored him was much smaller. Norris wouldve beat Ray that day, outspeeding him, outpunching him. Ray would not have been able to keep up
Terry also wouldve defeated the Leonard from the Kalule fight or the Geraldo fight of 79 in which Sugar weighed 153.
Re: Pryor. Duran jumped up TWO weight classes and defeated Ray. Pryor only needs to jump ONE. Also, Howard (20-4) gave Ray all he could handle and made him quit
@Piglatinsuperstar Howard was after Leonard came back from retirement, and he clearly was not the same fighter as before. Even Pryor said so. Everyone did. That was not him in his prime. That was after drug abuse. His nervous system was clearly damaged.
Norris/Leonard that night would have been interesting. I'd give it to Leonard, but I can't say I would feel fully confident. If he hit Norris to the body the way he hit Howard, he'd crumble. Pre-retirement, Leonard easily.
@Piglatinsuperstar In boxing, there's a saying, styles make fights. Leonard had the worst style for Hearns, yet beat him, because he was so good. Hagler had a much better style for Hearns, particularly because of the way Hearns fought (which was a mistake). Even so, Hagler almost got TKO'd because of cuts, and Hearns said he felt weak before the fight.
Leonard dominated Hearns whenever he threw punches. He moved too much early and got tired.
he beat him becuz Tommy came in 2 pounds under & wasnt strong enough. Tommy didnt keep his hands high enough and can't clinch (unlike Terry Norris who holds his guard high & clinched Leoanrd frequently before he could gain momentum)
Tommy really confused Ray with his movement, something that Norris would use to exploit Leonard's weakness & defeat him
Marvin didnt have nearly the same problem w Tommy and never fell behind the way Leonard did, becuz Marvin was the better boxer
@Piglatinsuperstar Hearns was in terrific shape, his weight is a poor excuse. Leonard was just a more talented fighter, with perfect form, and the shots that hit Hearns were beauties. His vicious body attack was a problem too.
Norris had no arms. "Stubby" Norris could not fight from the outside against Leonard, he was giving up six inches in reach. He would be giving up 10 inches to Hearns, so they weren't the same type of fighters.
Leonard simply moved too much early, and got tired.
if Leonard was the more talented fighter then how come he was so far behind (all 3 scorecards)
Hagler was far more effective against Hearns. Not even his change in tactics had any effect on Marvin the way they did with Leonard. Tommy's stick and move really threw him off. that's why I knew Norris with his speed wouldnt have any problems who beat him briliiantly. No matter which strategy Leonard chose, he failed. If he sparred from long range, Terry beat him at his own game
and when Leonard tried to close in (round two), he couldnt cope with Terry on the inside either! Terry was just too slick. his lightning hands would drill away at leonard's face instantly. you could hear the punches landing incredibly fast WHAP! WHAP! and Ray would have to back away. He had just never faced anyone this fast, this talented - EVER
I think a younger Ray wouldve done better but I dont think he wouldve won
@Piglatinsuperstar I don't think Leonard would have moved in against Norris. Norris was only a bit slower, only a bit less fluid, and hit harder. I think Leonard would have just outjabbed him with his better speed and reach. I think inside, Norris would have had the edge because of the short arms, and better punching power. He was unusual in having very good speed, and very good punching power. Not like Hearns, but I think Norris was a better combination puncher. But, the chin ...
not only is Howard shorter, look at the comparison between the two in shoulders, arms, and upper body. It's downright unconscionable the unfairness in this matchup. But like I said, you continue to fabricate to make up for your man's short comings. Things like "Norris' arms were too short" and other non truths. If Terry's arms were too short, how is it he made the record for title defenses at his weight? To me that spells SUCCESS
@Piglatinsuperstar His reach was 68", which is very short. Leonard's was 74", Hearns 78". He beat bums. He didn't fight many good fighters, and when he did they were old, or moving up in weight. Or he got knocked out.
there you go again fabricating. this time that Norris was slower. I've seen the two of them in the same ring together and I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that Norris was much much faster! and if you any evidence otherwise, then you're going to have to present it to me and frankly, YOU DON'T!
Norris isnt a sucker like Wilfred Benitez who spreads his feet far apart wasting his time jabbing with Leonard; that's INEFFECTUAL! My man movesin, scores while Ray is looking for
openings, then moves out of range. that's why Leonard could never score on him. Norris simply gets off quicker and beats Ray to the punch-EVERY TIME!!! DUH!
Leonard NEVER fought a mover like Norris in his life! so what evidence do you have that Ray would have a chance with Terry? None! You TRIED to pretend that Price was in Terry's class of speed. You failed. Again you tried with the pathetic Floyd mayweather sr, saying "well he was no good but had speed" which is completely laughable
@Piglatinsuperstar Hearns was faster than Norris. Price probably was too. Mayweather senior definitely was. If you knew boxing, you'd realize speed isn't everything. Norris was more accurate than either, and hit harder, but his hand speed was nothing special. Mayweather senior had really fast hands, but nothing on them, and nothing else.
Norris was a cut below the greats, and two cuts below the all-time greats. His weak chin, and short arms never would have gotten him to the top.
@Piglatinsuperstar Norris was smarter than Benitez; he fought Leonard when he was old and broken. At that stage, yes, Norris was faster. Look at Leonard against Hearns II. Brutally slow.
@Piglatinsuperstar The scoring in that fight was widely recognized as bad, give Leonard two point rounds in 6 and 7, and the fight was pretty close, but the problem was his tactics early were stupid. Dundee kept telling him to stick and move and he got tired doing so (it was very hot). When he settled down, he beat the crap out of Hearns, and then got tired and didn't throw enough punches until the 13th, when he again beat Hearns.
Stubby would have had a terrible time with those short arms
by whom? I myself gave Tommy the first 5 rounds becuz he outscored Ray. Ray did well I thought in rounds 4, 5 tho. it was a respectable showing by Ray. it was even more respectable showing by Ray when he caught Tommy round 6 and the ass kicking continued in round 7. But I never saw a superior display in boxing prowess or skills on Ray's part, but rather he put the hurt on Tommy in the same way Norris put the hurt on Ray and took HIM out of the fight. rd. 8 even, rds 9-12 Hearns'
@Piglatinsuperstar I gave Leonard round 4. I gave him six by 2, seven by 2, eight by 1, I think I had the 10th a draw. 13th by two. So, after 13, I had it 7-5-1 Hearns. By Leonard having three two-point rounds, so I had Leonard up by a point.
I could see round four going either way. So, could see Hearns by a point too, but at any rate, the fight was close at that point, the scoring was terrible. You didn't think 7 was a two-point round? Crazy.
round 7 was a two point round for Sugar as was 13. but the fact remains, I didnt see any superior BOXING or SKILLS on the part of Leonard. This is borne out of the fact that he not only was not ahead but in fact BEHIND!
and no, Tommy was not ahead by a point but SEVERAL. Round after round went by, with Tommy easily taking them as long as he MOVED which is what terry did. he beat him by MOVING
Tommy won rounds 1-5. Leonard won rounds 6,7. Rd 8 was a recovery round for Tommy who was 3 yrs away from his peak and sorely in need of some muscle
rds 8, 9,10,11,12, Tommy dazzled, confused, and bedazzled Sugar until the plodding, ineffective Sugarman (and I use that term loosely!) finally caught Tommy at the end of one his haymakers
Was Sugar more skilled? Stronger? Yes. More skilled, probably not except on defense. I knew the next good mover he met would probably beat him
seriously, who calls Terry Norris stubby? You invented that name yourself. but it doesnt make up for the fact that Norris was superior to Leonard and that leonard had no clue how to solve his style. anyways, I'm certainly not buying your poor explanation of how Ray would magically draw Terry to him. And if he couldnt? Then Ray is in for a long nite. Becuz how is Ray going to get Terry to stand still for him? How does Ray get Terry to chase Ray? He can't. he couldnt. He DIDN'T
But...notice the way TERRY got RAY to move in the way HE wanted. Terry OWNED Ray and made him move the way HE wanted. a great example is in round 7. WHy if I didnt know better I would swear that it was Terry that was the teacher and Ray the student. Terry gets Ray to follow him to the ropes, and as Leonard is THINKS he has him trapped, Terry catches him coming in with a BOOMING jab. This REALLY frustrated Ray like crazy. He wouldnt stand for it and once again fell for Terry's trap, following him
to the ropes. Remember this is the SAME round. Now Terry is baiting Ray. As Ray is looking for an opening that will put "glass jawed Norris" away, Terry cuts lose with a blazing, faster than the eye can follow, 1-2 that drops Ray to his knees (2nd knockdown)
I already knew that Terry was the better fighter but the way he toyed with Sugar proves that he owned Sugar and had him in his hip pocket. Sugar Ray was gr8 in his own time but he just didnt have the experience needed to deal w Terry
@Piglatinsuperstar Leonard had no business taking this fight. He was great in his time, in my opinion the most complete fighter to step into the ring, but he ruined his legacy by coming back.
He hand picked opponents, either they were too old, or they were not good in the first place. When he finally got in with a top shelf fighter, he was completely outclassed, and embarrassed. He could only beat washouts. It still irks me he gets credit for beating Hagler. He beat a shell.
@Piglatinsuperstar Leonard had no reflexes, and simply did not have the tools to do anything. When you're in that situation, you have to get in close and nullify as best you can the advantages. He was too slow, with no reflexes, so he had to try to get a lucky shot in. He probably could have knocked Norris out, and he did hurt him to the body, but he had to hit him, and with his reflexes gone, he had to get close and hope for a lucky shot.
@Piglatinsuperstar Norris would have to find a way inside. He couldn't fight outside against a guy with a 6 inch reach advantage. Plus, he'd have the hand speed deficit, which would make fighting outside impossible.
Norris would have to get inside and stay inside, but it would not be easy. He'd have to use his power/speed combination to try to offset Leonard's superior athleticism. Norris would give up speed, but not much, but he had a bigger punch. He'd lose, but it would be fun.
why would Terry have to when he can easily make Ray come after him? Again, where's your proof? You have none but I do!
and in reality the fight didnt go the way you're describing. Norris DIDNt have to make his way inside and in fact it was RAY that had to make HIS WAY inside (rd two)
and when he DID get in you know what happened! Terry slapped him down and Ray felt his guts turn to jelly. By round 3 it was basically over after Ray took that uppercut. He then lost his heart
@Piglatinsuperstar He fought a shot fighter, so Leonard had to get try to knock out a weak-chinned fighter, and the best way to nullify advantages is to brawl more.
Young Leonard was much faster, and had much better reflexes than this beaten down version. Thus, he'd have no problem beating Norris from outside, and wouldn't have to chase him. Norris would have to find a way inside of the longer armed fighter, or simply lose round after round by jabs. Or get knocked out by one :-P
@Piglatinsuperstar Actually, Leonard's jab was important against Hearns. Hagler was much slower. Fast jab always beats a slower jab, just look at Clay/Liston.
Leonard had a picture perfect jab. It was his main weapon against Benitez.
@Piglatinsuperstar Leonard was shot by the time he fought Norris. He had not fought a good fighter in his prime since he came back.
Leonard never fought middleweight, so he wasn't ducking Hagler, and in any event, he had plenty of great fighters in his own weight class. If he had been fighting at Middle, and avoided Hagler that would have been different.
I think Leonard was too talented for Hagler. But, we'll never know.
i don't think Norris could beat a prime Leonard. even a totally shot Leonard stayed around till the end, and Ray often had problems with slick boxers. wasn't he about 85 in this fight (lol)? his reflexes were gone, as well as his legs.
one of vintage SRL's combinations would have cracked Norris's chin like a champagne glass dropped on concrete. he would have had a chance at greatness if he could take a punch.
MrTrommylee 3 weeks ago
@MrTrommylee
Nobody said that BEFORE the fight! In fact, Ray was installed a heavy favorite & you couldnt find ONE person from the press picking Ray to LOSE
truth is, Ray went ELEVEN YEARS w/o LOSING. It's just that Ray couldnt handle fast boxers like TN & CH. He'd been given the luxury of picking badly compromised, slow, deteriorated fighters like Hagler, & lalonde (thought his eye held him back from boxing)
I think this fight really showed the extent of Ray's limitations as a fighter
Piglatinsuperstar 2 weeks ago
punk?? get a fkin grip. Guys a legend just like hagler.
roccomoss35 1 month ago
as a hagler fan, that was fun to watch :) but i will say that little punk (leonard) did show some heart
muhammadumarJA 1 month ago
Comment removed
Piglatinsuperstar 2 months ago
Comment removed
Piglatinsuperstar 2 months ago
he was trying to rope a dope norris
GCOUNDOU 3 months ago
Its not like Norris has the greatest defense. He has been knocked out multiple times. Just older Ray lost the speed to test the chin and the snap wasnt the same with all those layoffs. Watch young Leonard. The snap on his punches.
Davey Boy Green fight. Even when he misses you can see the snap on his shots. It was first round i think and Ray threw a Roy Jones like upercut from distance. Green blocked it but it was quick with snap
Thats youth and activity.
bscottdp 4 months ago
Difference between Norris and Hearns
Height: Norris was 5-9 and Hearns was 6-1. Thats four inches
Jab: Because Tommy was so tall and long that was a hard shot to get away from
Power: Tommy's big right hand after the jab is why Ray was cautious
So you cant use the Hearns fight and assume Ray fights Norris the same way in 1981. Ray doesnt have to worry about height, reach, big time jab. If Ray is simply 5 steps quicker. He touches that weak chin of Norris
bscottdp 4 months ago
Comment removed
Piglatinsuperstar 2 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Prime Sugar Switch to fighting and would beat down terry in a dog fight, and knock him out. Terrys Glass chin and suspect courage would break under the Prime Ray Leonard Assault like Bennitez and Hearns. Terry's no Bennitez and deffinatley no Hearns. Leonard boxed the fighters and fighted the boxers. He was a smart and clever as he was Gifted and Goodlooking. He could go from Boxing Beauty to Battering BEAST in a blink of an eye That's why he's one of the true G.O.A.T
LVSWTZ 2 months ago
@LVSWTZ
Suspect chin? how come it was Ray on the canvas-twice? My man didnt even blink when Ray hit him point blank with his BEST combinations! U talking that shit "Terry's glass chin would break under Ray's assault"
and the Benitez fight, any1 can see that wasnt a real stoppage but MERE FABRICATION. it looked like two little boyz staring at each other cuz that's all they DID! LOL!!
let's face it, if your man was even HALF the fighter u say, he wouldve had no problems w Norris
Piglatinsuperstar 1 week ago
I hope there will be another Sugar Ray Leonard a true champ not like this little bitch of Gayweather ! What he did this week against Victor Ortiz and Larry Merchant is indescriptible !! You see what sort of guy he is, I hope he will go to jail ! Gayweather is just a stupid asshole just good for beat is wife and maybe is children's ! If dlh were younger for the mayweather fight he could beat him more clearly that he did. Manny Pacquiao if you hear me : Knock this bastard out !!
frenchgoldenboyfan 5 months ago
@frenchgoldenboyfan
i LIKE Mayweather! He iz the greatest fighter ever p4p and he can fite who he likes. WHo are we to question him?
Piglatinsuperstar 4 months ago
@frenchgoldenboyfan So what Victor Ortiz did was okay in your opinion?
svp2010 4 months ago
The night Father Time finally caught up with Ray...To be honest he was lucky to get the verdict against Hagler...But thats another story.....Leonard was an all time great..and history has proved so was Terry!.....Ray fought two fights too many!
nealtracy 6 months ago
@nealtracy
the reason Leonard lost was simple: he never faced anyone with Terry's speed and didnt have the skillz to deal with him.
The combination of Terry's speed, movement, intelligence, & power was insurmountable and lead to breaking Leonard's back
2 much speed, 2 much movement
Piglatinsuperstar 6 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar OH PLEASE LOL! Ray was just old ,nothing more terry would go on to do nothing to distinguish himself as one the G.O.A.T He Beat up smaller older once great fighters like Ray. Taylor, Curry and Brown who KO'd him the 1st fight Was the only one to lose his title and rematch in back to back fights by DQ to a BUM! who was carried out on stretcher TWICE with title around his waist LMAO! (Whipping the Tears of Laughter from my Eyes) Terry was talented BUT MAN! Was he was Terrible.
LVSWTZ 2 months ago
Comment removed
Piglatinsuperstar 2 months ago
@LVSWTZ Norris was a GREAT fighter, with a shaky chin. That's why he was so much fun to watch. Lots of KOs in his fights.
MADMAC572 1 month ago
@LVSWTZ
I'm sorry but Ray was installed the heavy favorite to win this fight. The reason he didnt is becuz of an inability to handle blazing hand & foot speed. Ray had never faced a man possessing a combination of ring smarts, excellent mobiblity, speed, and who could box, bang N move.
and let's not forget which man had the superior chin: Norris. Which is why Terry stood up to Ray's best shots but ray couldnt stand up to Terry's
Piglatinsuperstar 2 weeks ago
Terry no match for a prime Leonard in my opinion
percoplus 6 months ago
@percoplus
so in your opinion, Norris didnt kick Leonard convincingly enough?
Leonard could face Norris five times at any point in his career and come out the loser five straight times
I love Leonard but Norris was all wrong for him. stick to the Dave Greens & Kalules of the world
Piglatinsuperstar 6 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar That was an old Leonard. You have a point. Leonard was not unbeatable in his prime, though. So maybe Terry might have had a shot at some point. There were a lot of great fighters at Ray's time. I agree he fought two fights too many. Ray would have beaten Camacho as well.
percoplus 6 months ago
@percoplus
Ray wouldnt have beat Camacho OR Norris
In the 80s Camacho close to being untouchable
and Norris was 2 fast 4 Ray. WHile Ray be looking for openings, Terry will paint
that's why I call Terry a artist
Piglatinsuperstar 6 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Maybe your memory is better than mine, Piglatin. How was Terry's chin? Could he have taken the best from Hearns, Hagler, Duran in their prime?
percoplus 6 months ago
Comment removed
Piglatinsuperstar 6 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Ha we're talking about prime. Terry was no stranger to the canvas later in his career, either. I just don't think he could have dealt with Hagler or Hearns - Sugar maybe. Was Terry primarily a welter or jr middleweight?
percoplus 6 months ago
Comment removed
Piglatinsuperstar 6 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Unfortunate for Norris he never had as many high profile fights, so very easy to underrate him.
percoplus 6 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Ray couldn't EVER handle Norris? You're trippin buddy. Sure, you might think it's a bad matchup for Ray. But remember, all three of those examples you gave (Hagler, Hearns, Duran 2), Ray was the dog. Hagler was unbeatable at the time. Hearns was a scary beast. And Duran had already gave it to Ray the 1st fight... RAY FOUND A WAY. Chances are he does the same vs. Norris. Whether he gets in his head, etc. One thing we know: Ray Leonard is a true champion. He would've taken Terry
JohnLeeMD 5 months ago
Comment removed
Piglatinsuperstar 5 months ago
Comment removed
Piglatinsuperstar 5 months ago
@JohnLeeMD SRL fought Hagler 10 years after MMH prime...and he lost IMHO
JoeyPencils 5 months ago
@JoeyPencils What's your point? SRL was coming off a five-year layoff, and was not in his prime anyway either. Whether YOU think he lost, he fought a competitve enough fight to have won the decision.
JohnLeeMD 4 months ago
@JohnLeeMD
In Rays prime he would have out classed Norris! Ray had far more tools than Norris ever possessed as a fighter.The only thing that Norris had over Ray was strength.But strength doesn't when fights against A Class Competition.
ESSENCEOFEACHTHING 4 months ago
Comment removed
Piglatinsuperstar 2 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar
I said "In Ray's prime". And also Ray was 35 in this fight and had approximately 1 fight per year since 1981.
In Ray's prime he was an over all better boxer than Norris.His hands were just as fast,Threw more fluent combinations,displayed great ability to come back when in trouble,great heart,could box or stalk.I can tell you this,Norris would not have been able to survive with Duran or Hearns at 147. Norris lacked the versatility.
ESSENCEOFEACHTHING 2 months ago
@ESSENCEOFEACHTHING
let's set the record straight: SRL had never accomplished as much as he had until he met Norris. At that point, he had won 5 world titles, beaten Hagler, and now here he was facing Norris w/o the ring rust that had plagued him going into the Hagler fight. what's more, he'd gone 11 yrs w/o a loss. His experience was legendary & shouldve won w/o working up a sweat. he wouldve won if not for the speed of norris.Sugar couldnt adjust like he could with the slower fighters
Piglatinsuperstar 2 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar
I question your knowledge of the sport based on this.I stated previously that from 81-91 Ray had approximately 1 fight per year.Between 84-87 he was inactive with 1 fight in 84 and 1 fight in 87.In 1991 the man was 35 yrs old.That is old for an athlete.You are not as fast and don't have the reflexes or stamina that once was.
Norris turned pro in 87.(within 5 yrs) By 91 when he faced Ray,Norris had 29 fights at 24 yrs old. He had every advantage.
ESSENCEOFEACHTHING 2 months ago
@ESSENCEOFEACHTHING
yeah but you're trying to use averages when in fact, most of those were between 82-87 and Ray had been far more busy going into the Norris fight. Ring rust was not the factor it had been like it had for Hagler. If anything, Ray shouldve been much sharper against Norris. The actual problem was Norris' speed. Rayhad never encountered anything close to it anywhere
ray also has the style that doesnt match up well w a mover like Norris. All his opponents are slow, stiff
Piglatinsuperstar 2 months ago
@ESSENCEOFEACHTHING -absolutely right. Too bad Leonard, like a lot of other boxers, didnt know when to quit
loyaldude10 2 months ago
@loyaldude10
It's hard to quit your job when you can make a at least a few million every night that you go out.They are fighters and this is how they earn a living.
ESSENCEOFEACHTHING 2 months ago
Comment removed
Piglatinsuperstar 2 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar
Terry Norris was a good athlete.He was very strong,Fast & threw crisp,strong combinations.But had a questionable chin.Do you really think that Norris would have did anything impressive against Duran,Hearns or Hagler at 154? With a questionable beard & a lack of versatility he would not have gotten passed either of them.
ESSENCEOFEACHTHING 2 months ago
@ESSENCEOFEACHTHING
Ray's other problem is that he takes too long to look for openings whilst Norris simply unloads while he's probling. Norris is trigger fisted which doesnt allow for Sugar the time he'd like to exploit those openings. So instead he has to worry about defending his chin
speaking of chins, I recall it was Norris who tooks Ray's best w/o so much as blinking. I dont recall Leonard being able to take Terry's w/o feeling the effects. Terry had Ray down twice
Piglatinsuperstar 2 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar
I will say this about Norris.From his devastating KO Loss to Julian Jackson in 1989.He went on to accumulate 15 straight wins before losing to another World Class fighter from my home town Simon Brown.To pick up the pieces and re focus the way that he did said a great,great deal about him.
ESSENCEOFEACHTHING 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Piglatinsuperstar Maybe your memory is better than mine, Piglatin. How was Terry's chin? Could he have taken the best shots from Hearns, Hagler, Duran in their prime?
percoplus 6 months ago
its sad to watch this, i hate when boxer's stay on to long in the sport till their skills are diminished and they look like literally a shadow of their former selves to opponents who wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes with them in their prime
hunnuit 8 months ago
@hunnuit Wrong. While a young Leonard would have had a better than 50/50 chance of beating Terry, he would never have had an easy time with a guy like Terry. The number of people he faced that were as talented as Terry you could count in one hand. Terry was the bigger man, could take Leonard's punch better than Leonard could take his. He was almost as fast as prime Leonard, had boxing skills to match. Had an unpredictable pace and rythmn, stuck between aggressive puncher and classic boxer.
allankles 8 months ago
@hunnuit Basically Terry Norris was the kind of guy who would have given Leonard hell at any point in his career. Against an aging Leonard it was one sided, against a young Leonard it would have been war.
allankles 8 months ago
@allankles - I agree that Norris was good,but don't forget about Leonard in his prime. There was no way that Norris could've beaten Leonard. Go look at his past highlights. he was cat quick,he hit for power every punch, and if he went the distance with Norris washed up,imagine what might've happen back in 81. he would've murdered Norris.
eddiecopelyn 7 months ago
@eddiecopelyn
Norris wouldve whipped Ray any time any place. leonard simply could not prepare for the speed. Ray never fought anyone w TN's speed. leonard only lost a slight step for this fight and was dominant over Duran (world middleweight champ)
Piglatinsuperstar 7 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar You have absolutely have lost your mind if you you say that Norris had more hand speed than a Leonard in his prime ,you crazy. Go watch film and then we can talk.
eddiecopelyn 7 months ago
@eddiecopelyn
Ray had alot of speed, almost as much as Terry but he was too hesitant sometimes taking too long to look for the right opening whereas Terry would just drill someone. Terry was trigger-fisted. you couldnt stop him once he got going
Piglatinsuperstar 7 months ago
@eddiecopelyn While Leonanrd in his prime was quicker handed the only guy he fought with the kind of handspeed Norris had was probably Hearns. And Norris was faster than Hearns in terms of varied combination punching. So all in all, ironically Norris was one of the top 3 or 2 most gifted boxers Leonard had ever fought. Unfortunately for him, he fought him in his twilight.
allankles 6 months ago
i think norris should be in the hall of fame
AliRidah619 8 months ago
Legands die hard, Ray in his prime would have beten Norris with no problem; but in this fight Sugar Ray is shown that he is just a shadow of his old self. And this fight was also like Ali vs Holmes. A sad way for a legend to go out, but you hav eto know when you time is up.
bigb1716 10 months ago
@bigb1716
you lie! leonard could NEVER beat Norris. If they fouught ten times Norris would beat him every time. Norris had too much speed and Leonard had never faced anyone with his level of speed
Which part of this ass whipping gives u the impression Ray could possible do well with Terry? Even tho Ray had a huge edge in experience and went 11 w/o a loss, he was no match for the young speedster/phenom! Norris was slick, quick, and made Ray Leonard sick!
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar
I agree with bigb, prime leonard would own this guy. Norris is 23, Leonard is freakin 34 here....
After that first KO, Norris hit him while he was down. And Leonard wasn't even mad. If that was prime Leonard, he'd be looking for blood after that.
stubaru 9 months ago
@stubaru
you're going to have to justify that statement "Leonard would own this guy". What part of their fight gave you THAT impression? Leonard has never done well with fighters that had speed
being 34 is no excuse. he only had 35 fights. compare that with Monzon who had well over 100 fights and still going strong at 35 on top of his division. In leonard's previous fight the year before he owned Duran, dominating with flurries, hand speed & lateral movement but couldnt do it with TN!
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar I agree 34 isn't that old, but you don't know boxing at all if you can't see Leonard is WAY past his prime. He was never the same after coming back, even against Hagler he looked horrible (so did Hagler).
Now, I'm going to tell you what to look for. Young Ray Leonard had possibly the best left hook boxing as seen, this Ray Leonard has no left hook. Watch it against Duran or Hearns I, watch it here.
You really can't see a difference?
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
he really wasnt. in his last fight against Duran Ray won every round easy, his legs in perfect order, the combinations as fast as furious and as effortless as ever.
Norris exposed Ray's weakness which was the difficulty with dealing with fast mobile slicksters. Especially a slickster like Norris that could bang box and move so Leonard wasnt able to land his left hook cuz Norris would never stand still for him. so forget all this BS you see from people like stubaru. he's dreaming
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar It's got nothing to do with Norris. Leonard had fought, and beaten faster fighters than Norris before. Hearns was a far more difficult fighter.
Watch how wide and slow Leonard's left was. His own lawyer said after he saw him throw a hook in this fight, it was all over for him. He also looks very weak.
He did drugs, and aged really badly. Watch the Hagler fight too. Both looked horrible, just Hagler was worse. Against Hearn II, watch how slow they both are.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
None as fast as Norris. Hearns had a better right hand but not as well balanced a fighter as TN, who had better stamina, all around speed, & defense, and much faster on his feet. Hagler was shot. Duran was a lightweight and benitez, I never thought much of him anyways.
Leonard wasnt really slow and thanks to Hagler's slowness fought the best fight of his career. norris, he just made him LOOK slow. Ray wasnt used to the speed even when Ray was active he wouldnt fight anyone fast
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Hearns was faster than Norris, and a much better fighter. There's no comparison there. He had reach, height, power, and strangely for Hearns, a better chin. Leonard was shot against Hagler.
Watch Leonard against Mayweather. Benitez was fast too. Hearns, very fast. How about the Andy Price? Very fast, and you'll never see a better combination thrown by a fighter in your life than Ray Leonard's.
Norris was on the level of Benitez. Good, but not great.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
got to dissagree with you. Hearns was also lacking on defense. he was just a tall guy with a basic stick and move strategy that mostly worked on Leonard until he ran out of gas
to give credit tho, the attack from leonard in rds 6,7 probably had something to do with it as well as Tommy's weight of 145, partly Tommy's fault, partly Leonard's
Norris was better all around fighter on defense w lightning left hook/uppercut SRL had no defense against
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Hearns was not a stick and move fighter, he looked best moving forward. Leonard made him back up. The weight is nonsense, he had fantastic stamina that fight, better than Leonard. Look at the movement and number of punches he threw.
Norris was not nearly as fast as a young Leonard, and not even as quick as Hearns, and had the weakest chin seen, and only good (not great like Hearns) power.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
benitez was actually slow. Norris had what Benitez lacked: speed and also offense minded attack that he revved up as we saw against Leonard
price he was a joke having lost 4 times between 1976 & 1979
Hearns didnt become great till 3 yrs after the leonard fight similar to Joe Louis two years after the 1st loss
having bulked up he seemed much faster, didnt bruise as easy and greatly improved going into the Hagler fight. I remember those days well. he was almost invincible
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Hearns was seen as invincible before Leonard, and in fact was the 7-5 favorite. He was his best at 147, where he was extremely tall, had a HUGE punch, huge reach, and his chin was still OK. At 154 and especially 160, he was much more vulnerable. All of his advantages were lessened, although he was still excellent at 154.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
thats Hollywood buildup. that's what the media does. i believe Leonard was 6-5 fave. not much was known about Hearns other than his KO of Cuevas. hadnt really face anyone outside of Pipino and would be several years before peaking
dont think youre going to find many people agreeing that Tommy had peaked going after just three years. too thin & undeveloped until moving up to 154 where after 4 more years put on much needed muscle and appeared much stronger & fit
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Actually, you can look at the SI article. Hearns was 7-5 favorite . Everyone knew of Hearns, how is someone favored over Leonard and not known? He had a huge knockout ratio, was never beaten, and destroyed everyone. He was like Tyson, but with a higher knockout ratio, and was tall and with reach. No one heard of it.
Always remember, everything is relative. 154 pounders are bigger, taller, stronger with more reach. So, compare Hearns relative to opponents.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
oddsmakers had is 6-5 SRL. I went with Ray also. Hearns only had the Cuevas fight and I felt he was mostly an unknown quantity even tho he did have unusual height and reach. At the same time I didnt feel Tommy was as well balanced a fighter as Leonard, nor did I feel his experience could match Ray's. Nor did he Angelo Dundee as his trainer who I felt was superior to Manny St. Nor did I feel he had Leonard's mental toughness. Leonard was tougher. By '84 that had completely reversed
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar From SI "At the end of the 12th round in their first bout, Hearns, who was a 7-5 favorite, was leading grandly, if somewhat insanely, on all three judges' cards."
No one ever entering the ring was as well balanced as Leonard, but Hearns had BIG advantages in height, reach, and power. On top of that, he was almost as quick, had crazy heart, and great stamina that fight. He was a nightmare. That fight had more talent/skill than any other.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
ok but who's EVERYONE? Most were ready to be knocked off and had sported several knockout losses such as broken down in it for his last payday Angel Espada
is everyone Jim Richards? Jose Figueroa? Randy Shields? 6 years past his prime Clyde Gray? Pablo Baez with his emergency last minute top ten ranking so he could get the fight sanctioned by the WBA?
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Look at his fights outside of the welterweight division after that. Worse names, with worse results. Shields was a pretty good fighter. Cuevas a good fighter. Bruce Curry was decent. Luis Primera undefeated. Not great like the guys Leonard beat, but, considering how he beat these guys, still impressive. Who did Norris beat in his prime? A shot ex-great fighter, and overblown lightweight. Plus, all the knockout losses.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
actually the results got better; an easy win over 3 time champ Benitez, some sturdy trial horses, Minchillo, Sutherland, Singletary which helped his endurance a lot. after which he began peaking. A frightening Ko over Duran & Hutchins, Hearns had never looked better and improved dramitically as one would expect
as for the others are u kidding? Primera, all those guys no one knew where they were coming from. Shields posed no threat whatsoever
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Did you say Benitez wasn't very good? Sturdy trial horses? They were the same type of fighter you criticize. Duran was a blown up lightweight, remember? And this was WAY past his prime, after Leonard castrated him.
Shields was at least as good as most of those guys you call trial horses. Benitez truly was a very good fighter, but style wise, Hearns was a nightmare. Well, that's true for almost anyone fighting Hearns.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
Benitez was ok but his offense was lacking. not much fire or will to win in tough fights the way Terry had. Terry wouldve put the pressure on if he found himself falling behind
Terry had a lot more energy and nerve then Wilfred who, was only a defensive fighter. takes more than a good defense to win the important fights
the trial horses I was talking about were the guys Tommy started fighting after he moved up: McKraken, etc. They helped Tommy build his endurance & develop
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
I can even tell you when guys peaked
Hagler started peaking around mid 1977 and then rebouded to another peak frighteningly high in 1981 by my est. You dont see fighters fighting at this level of supremacy ever. the last time was in Robinson 1950-51 then he began fading and losing
Tommy peaked around the same age as hagler-25. He got so good he did away with guys like Duran, snuffing them ridiculously easy
I just got a eye for these things. who esle you want to know about?
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar You don't have any eye for it, if you think Leonard was in his prime when he fought Norris. In fact, I'd say you're probably worse at this than anyone if you believe that. He was completely shot by then, and was already badly faded when he fought Hagler. Hagler was even worse.
Leonard's best fight was probably Duran II, when he was incredibly sharp. Hearns physically was best at 147, but he had holes (didn't know how to fight hurt). Above 147, his chin was a problem.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
i in fact do. Ray had just pitched a shutout over Duran winning every round and did it by boxing & moving. You cant be shot and still box & move like that! Its very hard to say he had nothing left as you claim after a performance like that. Remember SRL had little wear on his body due to the short # of fights
the Hagler fight was his best even tho hags was shot. Ray got a little tired but this is nothing unusual for him (he had trouble keeping up with Duran in the 1st fight)
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Actually, if you knew anything about what you're talking, you'd realize that Leonard won the last three rounds of Duran I on the scorecards, and gave Duran a beating in the 14th, and Duran basically didn't even fight the 15th.
Leonard did drugs, and his body never recovered. He looked like crap against Hagler. Hagler was totally shot. Can you imagine prime Leonard against someone that slow?
You use a fight almost a year and a half, against a 38 year old, as proof?
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
I dont know about the last 3 rds. I think your description is a real stretch. he did win some of the rounds as Duran eased off the gas. but this shows that Leonard did tire. all his fans act as tho he never tired and obviously he did becuz he had problems keeping pace with Duran
in fact you cant really show me one major fight where Leonard dominated his opponent outside of the passive Benitez. Tommy Hearns was wayyyy ahead and Duran 2, Roberto basically dropped 40 lbs for the ft
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar It's not debatable, it's a fact. Leonard won the 13th round on 2 out of 3 scorecards, and won the 14th and 15th on all scorecards. He couldn't keep up? Duran took an unwholesome beating the 14th, and was so beaten by then, he had nothing for the 15th.
You make the least sense of anyone here. A fight Leonard came on strong late is a fight you use to say he couldn't keep pace. Have you ever watched the fight?
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
that's why Leonard didn take the fight w Hagler earlier. he was just waiting to get to the sloppy leftovers. he couldve taken it in 82 or 83 or 84. He was fighting wasnt he? A guy named Kevin Howard. so no one can really use that lame excuse "he was out becuz of his eye". I never believed the eye story anyways. especially the way he kept fighting in the late 80s, one guy after antnother. on top of that he discards the thumbless gloves beginning w Lalonde
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Again, you are being illogical. Howard was after his layoff, and he knew he needed some fights to get tip top. He also knew Hagler was a shot fighter when he fought him. Coming off the layoff, he would never have fought Hagler at his prime, but he saw he was very slow by that time.
The reality is, neither fighter was the same. Both were well past their prime, and that's why the fight was close. Same with Hearns/Leonard II.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
were leonard's legs working in that fight or not? I'm talking about uno mas
He danced and danced to the point the crowd booed him. and he did it w/o tiring
Werent those 8 punch combinations he unloaded on Duran?
How does all this add up to Leonard being shot? And Duran had just defeated Barkley the WBC champ
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Duran was 38 years old, and Duran never could fight anyone that moved, even in his prime. Leonard embarrassed him their second fight because of that.
You are the only one that thinks Leonard was in his prime when he fought Norris and Camacho, and frankly, you're often wrong, and use a fight where one guys wins the last three rounds as an example of him tiring badly. There's something not working in your head. Norris past prime 31, Leonard prime 40? Weird.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Hearns had great endurance against Leonard. Don't forget, that night it was HOT in the ring, really hot. Hearns threw more punches than Leonard by a long shot, and moved most of the last part of the fight. Leonard was tired more of the fight, and after moving too much early, really took a lot of time off.
Hearns had the weak chin, and body, and that became more of a liability as he moved up in weight. It's a lot easier to take a punch from a 147 pounder than 154.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
the question should be who DIDNT Norris beat in his prime. its like a whos-who of hall of fame. Starched Mugabi in 1. Leonard probably wished he had never taken the fight, Brown, Curry and the fastest fighter ever Meldrick Taylor
Norris could do it all!
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Taylor was WAY too small. Leonard was a shadow of himself. Brown was a scrub, who managed to knock Norris out, and nearly put him out with a jab.
Who didn't he beat? Julian Jackson? McCallum? Hearns? He was the master of beating undersized and overaged fighters. Curry was shot by the time they fought.
Did you know Norris retired at 31, which, by your definition is well into his prime. Why did Lourent Boudouani beat him? Rene Jacquot? Dana Rosenblatt?
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
no he wasnt. If you say that then you have to ask yourself what was Duran doing fighting Sugar Ray Leonard
Both Meldrick and Duran came up from 135 and took a portion of the welterweight title. Terry even dropped weight and came down to 149 to make it easier!
But Terry was still supreme that nite. Only HE had the right stuff to effectively deal with the incredible speed of Meldrick that left Chavez confused, baffled,a dn oft times utterly humiliated and gun shy
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar But, I can help you wade through your misconceptions and confusion. Duran had been fighting above 140 (meaning welterweight) for two years before he fought Leonard. Taylor had to move up in weight, and at any rate was never the fighter Duran was. He got hit too easily, and was the worst style for Norris. I remember when they made that fight I was wondering how Taylor even had a chance, it was stylististic nightmare. He had no punch either.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
Duran had 6 fights above 135 before meeting Leonard. Taylor had at least a few including defenses of his welterweight title before meeting Norris two years later, the same stretch of time before Duran met Leonard
why dont we compare Taylor's age to Duran's age when they had their showdowns. Taylor: 25 to Duran's 29
let's not try to turn Norris-Taylor into a suddenly percieved mismatch
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Duran had been fighting at Welterweight for a few years, Taylor was not a superwelterweight. But, more than that, style wise, Taylor had no chance at all. It was all wrong for him. Let's be real, Taylor was not a great fighter, and got hit constantly in every fight. Being short, and having to get in, and with no real defense, he was easy meat for a guy much bigger, who hit much harder. He was probably a better fighter than Norris, but styles make fights.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
Dec 78 - June 1980 is a few years? Taylor had been defending his crown for a year and half so is even more suited for the welterweight division than Duran who spent 11 yrs at 135
also, you failed to say why Norris was wrong for Taylor. Everyone gets hit and the fact is, even in the Chavez fight Taylor would do most of the hitting, thats why he was essentially unbeaten (Ref Steele robbed Melrick of his rightful victory)
Mel outhit Chavez at least 12-1 thats why he was so ahead
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Duran fought at 150 pounds (above welter) 9-1-1978. Did you forget that?
Taylor had essentially no defense, he was not a guy that tried to make you miss, he just fired back and hit you more. On top of this, he had no punching power, although he did hurt Norris with a body shot a bit. Against someone a lot bigger, with much more reach, who hit much harder, he had no chance. It was a complete mismatch because of their styles.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
first of all that's false. It was Norris that hurt Taylor with the body shots. It was Taylor's legs that buckled from body shots in the same way Leonard's legs buckled from Terry's right hand to the body.
Norris never buckled in the Taylor fight. and to say that Taylor had no defense is laughable. He is a student of Lou Duva and the reason he seems not to bother with defesne is becuz Meldrick does all the pitching. Ask JC Chavez
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Norris did hurt Taylor with body shots too, but Taylor hurt him a bit, and also stunned him with a right to the head. Norris had that glass jaw, after all.
Taylor had terrible defense, and got hit repeatedly by Chavez. He also had very short arms, which made it difficult to get in with Norris. Also, the fight was called too soon, Taylor was fine.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
if what youre saying is true then why did Chavez have so much trouble with Taylor?
Personally I think Meldrick woudve given Leonard hell, alot more problems that he gave to Terry.
Terry know how to handle speed. he wasnt afraid to meet someone like that head on and engage them immediately. Leonard wasnt so anxious to start off fast the way Norris would or Hagler
as for Duran, youre only talking a couple of months. Taylor had been fighting on the championship level 2 yrs
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
I still cant believe all the problems Kevin gave to Sugard, a guy much smaller & physically weaker backing up the larger man, giving him all he could handle, then retiring him. he retired Leonard for 3 years! Kevin really gave him headaches, enough to want to forget all about the game
I think a guy like Meldrick wouldve flurried Ray into a points defeat
and Norris? He wouldve given him another butt whuppin, same as he did when they fought. u just cant make a case for him winning
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Chavez was small, didn't have good reach, and wasn't very fast. Taylor didn't have to get inside his reach, and Chavez was not 150 pounds. Leonard was much faster than Norris, and would have pitched a shutout against Taylor, but, I don't think he would have knocked him out as earlier. I think Taylor would have either lasted the fight, or been stopped on cuts or something.
Norris only had one edge over Leonard, he did hit harder.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
I dont know of anyone but you that has said Meldrick had no chance. you made it up. you make up a lot of stuff. for instance "leonard was a lot faster than Norris"
Oh really? Then why did he have so many problems putting Howard away? Putting Kalule away? Putting Bonds away?
Someone like Taylor would give Ray Leonard fits. Leonard doesnt have what it takes to compete with a lightning trigger fisted fighter like Norris or Taylor. In fact, he passed up Nunn for that very reason
Piglatinsuperstar 9 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar A lot of people before that fight felt Taylor was in decline, and was style wise a big problem.
Kalule had never been knocked down, and was a jump up in weight. Leonard knocking him out was a big surprise.
Howard was slow, and that was after his comeback.
The last time Bonds had been knocked out was 7 years earlier, and Leonard hurt him constantly. He was also a southpaw, which Leonard never really liked.
TA152H01 9 months ago
@TA152H01
no it wasnt. Kalule wasnt even known outside of Europe so how could the KD be a surprise?
Kalule was the black version of Dave Green-slow, immobile, no punch, no speed, no jab, and came straight at you
and the jump you speak of isnt the same kind of jump Roberto Duran had to make for Leonard
Which is the bigger challenge: moving up from 135 up 20 pounds to beat a guy like Leonard or moving up from 147 FIVE pounds for someone like Kalule. everyone knew he would lose
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Leonard was clearly the favorite, but no one knew Kalule would be knocked out. He had never been down. Bonds had also never really been knocked out (his KO loss was from cuts), and had only been down once. Going up 7 pounds and fighting a guy who had never lost, or been down, who was champ, and knocking him out is very impressive.
Duran went up 11 pounds, not 20, and had been fighting welter for two years. Leonard actually went up to fight Kalule.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
and you know this how? Did you take a poll? There was no poll so how would you know?
please stop trying to make Kalule and Bonds out as some indestructible bad asses with Leonard being so great that he toppled these two non entities. Kalule and Bonds were NOTHING! The feeling among fans, crtitcs was how Bonds managed to last 11 rounds and that the tko of Kalule was no big deal
Slow, clumsy, no movement, no punch, no speed. Just a walking punching bag
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Watch the fight, and even the commentators say how difficult it is to knock out Kalule, and how sturdy he is.
Reality is, he never got knocked down before that fight, and Bonds got knocked down once, and only stopped on cuts. Leonard stopped both, Kalule after moving up a weight class.
That's pretty impressive for a guy that's not known for being a puncher.
Do you think Norris would have been able to go 15 rounds against Duran?
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
tell that to Davey moore. he had only 10 fights and stopped him.
again, how did Bonds last so long? Norris wouldve kicked BOTH their asses and on the same night
if you want to talk about impressive knockouts, were talking about Hearns-Duran, Hagler-Obel 2, Hagler-Hamsho 2, Hagler-Hearns. that's serious stuff
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Norris might have been knocked out by either, since he had the weakest of chins.
He did hit harder than Leonard though, I'll give you that. But the problem is, he had such a soft chin, if he got hit, he'd go down.
Hagler Hearns was a nothing knockout, Hearns was simply tired. Obel? Who cares? How about Leonard/Green. Marciano/Walcott? Leonard's knockout of Andy Price was the most impressive I have ever seen. Unreal combination that no one else could throw.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
its like I said, youre just fabricating cuz nothing you say ever turns out to be true!
For instance, you say Terry had the weakest of chins but in reality it was Ray leonard that had the weakest of chins cuz Terry dont even FEEL his shots even at point blank range rds, 1 ,2, 11. you keep taling about how Terry had a weak chin. I dont see Terry buckle from Ray's shots. So what you have to say is that since Terry is putting Ray on the floor, that it's really Sugar cant take a shot
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Norris got KNOCKED DOWN by a jab, in his prime, against a past his prime welter. Leonard never got down before he retired.
Watch Brown KNOCK OUT Norris. Not TKO. He was unconscious. He had the weakest chin I've seen. A jab from a guy moving up in weight? Crazy.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
1st of all, Price had 4 losses in the last 2 years prior to meeting Sugar so he was just an overhyped pretender and it showed. what a laugh! The TV Execs couldnt even figure out how to build up Price as a serious challenge
Obel on the other hand was his 2nd time around as leading WBA contender (like Hamsho) and better the second time around (never lost like Green or Price)
Obel had actually improved by around 40%! But here's the thing, SO DID Hagler!!! ergo, Hagler KO 5 Obel
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar You're thinking is very disjointed. Watch that combination. It's the best I've ever seen. Price was a pretty good fighter, that's it, but that's not the point. The combination was spectacular. Timber Terry could never have thrown it.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
It's okay except that Price was what I call a non entity. that is, he was a fighter without marquee value. Check the record
Hagler's tko over Obel remains in my mind the CLASSIC knockout who had improved at least 40 % over the 1st time since he met Hagler. He went 8 the 1st time but only 5 the second time. No one stood a chance against Marvin then. Everyone was afraid of him. Hearns pulled out that year not once but TWICE.
continued,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
then Leonard who THOUGHT he had the guts & skills to beat him, called Hagler into Baltimore C. Center Nov 82, began hyping a fight between them. then quickly did an abrupt about face by the very next sentence!
I knew Sugar didnt have the right stuff to take the fight becuz he wasnt that caliber of fighter to take on so dominant a fighter. While Hearns had been knocking over tomato cans, Ray knew that hagler had been knocking over the top fighters coming up with the ranking of #1 contenders
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar I like Hagler a lot, but, he would have had a very difficult time against prime Leonard. Leonard had ungodly talent, and was the most complete fighter to enter the ring. Hagler was a tough, skilled fighter, but his level of talent was simply not there. He had size though, and long arms, but, style wise, it would have been the worst type of fight for Hagler.
I have nothing but respect for Hagler, but, Leonard in his prime would have been a nightmare for him. Bad style.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
If that were true Sugar wouldve proved it by facing Hagler & beating him. The fact that he didnt says a lot so one can only conclude it wouldve been a easy blowout for Hagler. Hagler was too versatile anyways and no one wanted to see Ray get hurt
and while talent is nice to have, its the ability to hurt and take the other guy out of the game, that counts. See Norris-SRL for proof. Sugar, probably the better fighter ON PAPER, got slapped down rd and felt his guts turn to jelly
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
talking talent, let's compare: Jab goes to hagler (put 55 sticthes in Hamsho's face with it. Tore a hole in Sibson face and hastened his downfall the very next round, snapped Hearn's head with it)
Chin goes to Hagler in a landslide. Boxing ability: Hagler. Ray fell way behind in the Hearns fight,, not impressed. The following month, hagler dominated Hamsho, making Sugar Ray resemble a piker by comparison. Footwork also hagler. Combinations: Leonard. Defense: Hagler: everything else; Hagler
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Leonard had a better jab, left hook, straight right, uppercut, footwork etc... Leonard never got knocked down in his prime. Defense wasn't close, Leonard by a landslide.
Leonard had too much speed for Hagler. Hagler was the bigger fighter though, and had better reach. But, he was giving so much away in talent, as tough as he was, I think it's just the worst fight for him style wise. Styles make fights.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
how can he have a better jab than Marvin Hagler's? Hagler put 55 stitches in Hamsho's face and several more in Sibson. Whose face did Leonard's jab ever rip apart?
you're just making flase claims that dont exist. that's the thing about Leonard's fans; they always fabricate becuz there's so little to his accomplishments. Hagler's right hook was also superior, no doubt. hagler could fight equally well as both the agressor or on the backfoot, Leonard couldnt
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
Hagler's chin-WAY freaking better. Leonard actually got hurt by Geraldo in an over the waight match
Watch leonard trying to chase Hearns down in fight one. he doesnt even know what he's doing! He's obviously making it up as he goes along. While hagler was by far more effective in bringing down the same Hearns (better version tho)
that's 3 rds vs 14!
then again the only OTHER time Ray was forced to cope with a slick boxer (Norris),, his luck ran out and couldnt solve him in time
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Hagler almost got stopped by a past his prime Hearns. But, he had a better style for Hearns than Leonard.
Watch Leonard in the rounds he threw punches. He beat Hearns pretty easily. That right in the 13th was a punch of beauty, so was the double hook that ended the fight.
That's just a level of talent Hagler didn't have.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
not from where I sat. hagler took the first then the second then took him out 1:48 rd three whereas it took Leonard 14 long rounds, most of which he looked clueless in trying to figure out how to corner Tommy. he was basically just throwing haymakers.
that last joke of yours "there's just a lvel of talent Hagler didnt have" is hilarious when you consider it took hagler 3 rds to Leonard's 14. I guess in your book, less is more eh?
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
it would be a lot different had Ray also whipped Pryor, then Curry. THAT would impress me! but what did he really do? There's so little. you cant even say he beat Norris. that would help a little
meanwhile hagler won twice as many bouts as leonard and was never stopped. Leonard was dropped all the time
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Leonard was never knocked down in his prime, only after he came back. He was never the same fighter after that.
Pryor was too small to even be competitive. Curry came after Leonard had retired. Hearns was far better than both, and so was Duran. Pryor would have been killed by Leonard or Hearns, he was just too small.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
27 is not his prime? Not only that but the opponent that floored him was much smaller. Norris wouldve beat Ray that day, outspeeding him, outpunching him. Ray would not have been able to keep up
Terry also wouldve defeated the Leonard from the Kalule fight or the Geraldo fight of 79 in which Sugar weighed 153.
Re: Pryor. Duran jumped up TWO weight classes and defeated Ray. Pryor only needs to jump ONE. Also, Howard (20-4) gave Ray all he could handle and made him quit
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Howard was after Leonard came back from retirement, and he clearly was not the same fighter as before. Even Pryor said so. Everyone did. That was not him in his prime. That was after drug abuse. His nervous system was clearly damaged.
Norris/Leonard that night would have been interesting. I'd give it to Leonard, but I can't say I would feel fully confident. If he hit Norris to the body the way he hit Howard, he'd crumble. Pre-retirement, Leonard easily.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar In boxing, there's a saying, styles make fights. Leonard had the worst style for Hearns, yet beat him, because he was so good. Hagler had a much better style for Hearns, particularly because of the way Hearns fought (which was a mistake). Even so, Hagler almost got TKO'd because of cuts, and Hearns said he felt weak before the fight.
Leonard dominated Hearns whenever he threw punches. He moved too much early and got tired.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
he beat him becuz Tommy came in 2 pounds under & wasnt strong enough. Tommy didnt keep his hands high enough and can't clinch (unlike Terry Norris who holds his guard high & clinched Leoanrd frequently before he could gain momentum)
Tommy really confused Ray with his movement, something that Norris would use to exploit Leonard's weakness & defeat him
Marvin didnt have nearly the same problem w Tommy and never fell behind the way Leonard did, becuz Marvin was the better boxer
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Hearns was in terrific shape, his weight is a poor excuse. Leonard was just a more talented fighter, with perfect form, and the shots that hit Hearns were beauties. His vicious body attack was a problem too.
Norris had no arms. "Stubby" Norris could not fight from the outside against Leonard, he was giving up six inches in reach. He would be giving up 10 inches to Hearns, so they weren't the same type of fighters.
Leonard simply moved too much early, and got tired.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
if Leonard was the more talented fighter then how come he was so far behind (all 3 scorecards)
Hagler was far more effective against Hearns. Not even his change in tactics had any effect on Marvin the way they did with Leonard. Tommy's stick and move really threw him off. that's why I knew Norris with his speed wouldnt have any problems who beat him briliiantly. No matter which strategy Leonard chose, he failed. If he sparred from long range, Terry beat him at his own game
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
and when Leonard tried to close in (round two), he couldnt cope with Terry on the inside either! Terry was just too slick. his lightning hands would drill away at leonard's face instantly. you could hear the punches landing incredibly fast WHAP! WHAP! and Ray would have to back away. He had just never faced anyone this fast, this talented - EVER
I think a younger Ray wouldve done better but I dont think he wouldve won
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar I don't think Leonard would have moved in against Norris. Norris was only a bit slower, only a bit less fluid, and hit harder. I think Leonard would have just outjabbed him with his better speed and reach. I think inside, Norris would have had the edge because of the short arms, and better punching power. He was unusual in having very good speed, and very good punching power. Not like Hearns, but I think Norris was a better combination puncher. But, the chin ...
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
not only is Howard shorter, look at the comparison between the two in shoulders, arms, and upper body. It's downright unconscionable the unfairness in this matchup. But like I said, you continue to fabricate to make up for your man's short comings. Things like "Norris' arms were too short" and other non truths. If Terry's arms were too short, how is it he made the record for title defenses at his weight? To me that spells SUCCESS
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar His reach was 68", which is very short. Leonard's was 74", Hearns 78". He beat bums. He didn't fight many good fighters, and when he did they were old, or moving up in weight. Or he got knocked out.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
there you go again fabricating. this time that Norris was slower. I've seen the two of them in the same ring together and I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that Norris was much much faster! and if you any evidence otherwise, then you're going to have to present it to me and frankly, YOU DON'T!
Norris isnt a sucker like Wilfred Benitez who spreads his feet far apart wasting his time jabbing with Leonard; that's INEFFECTUAL! My man movesin, scores while Ray is looking for
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
openings, then moves out of range. that's why Leonard could never score on him. Norris simply gets off quicker and beats Ray to the punch-EVERY TIME!!! DUH!
Leonard NEVER fought a mover like Norris in his life! so what evidence do you have that Ray would have a chance with Terry? None! You TRIED to pretend that Price was in Terry's class of speed. You failed. Again you tried with the pathetic Floyd mayweather sr, saying "well he was no good but had speed" which is completely laughable
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Hearns was faster than Norris. Price probably was too. Mayweather senior definitely was. If you knew boxing, you'd realize speed isn't everything. Norris was more accurate than either, and hit harder, but his hand speed was nothing special. Mayweather senior had really fast hands, but nothing on them, and nothing else.
Norris was a cut below the greats, and two cuts below the all-time greats. His weak chin, and short arms never would have gotten him to the top.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Norris was smarter than Benitez; he fought Leonard when he was old and broken. At that stage, yes, Norris was faster. Look at Leonard against Hearns II. Brutally slow.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar The scoring in that fight was widely recognized as bad, give Leonard two point rounds in 6 and 7, and the fight was pretty close, but the problem was his tactics early were stupid. Dundee kept telling him to stick and move and he got tired doing so (it was very hot). When he settled down, he beat the crap out of Hearns, and then got tired and didn't throw enough punches until the 13th, when he again beat Hearns.
Stubby would have had a terrible time with those short arms
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
by whom? I myself gave Tommy the first 5 rounds becuz he outscored Ray. Ray did well I thought in rounds 4, 5 tho. it was a respectable showing by Ray. it was even more respectable showing by Ray when he caught Tommy round 6 and the ass kicking continued in round 7. But I never saw a superior display in boxing prowess or skills on Ray's part, but rather he put the hurt on Tommy in the same way Norris put the hurt on Ray and took HIM out of the fight. rd. 8 even, rds 9-12 Hearns'
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar I gave Leonard round 4. I gave him six by 2, seven by 2, eight by 1, I think I had the 10th a draw. 13th by two. So, after 13, I had it 7-5-1 Hearns. By Leonard having three two-point rounds, so I had Leonard up by a point.
I could see round four going either way. So, could see Hearns by a point too, but at any rate, the fight was close at that point, the scoring was terrible. You didn't think 7 was a two-point round? Crazy.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
round 7 was a two point round for Sugar as was 13. but the fact remains, I didnt see any superior BOXING or SKILLS on the part of Leonard. This is borne out of the fact that he not only was not ahead but in fact BEHIND!
and no, Tommy was not ahead by a point but SEVERAL. Round after round went by, with Tommy easily taking them as long as he MOVED which is what terry did. he beat him by MOVING
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Actually, even by your own scoring, you gave him rounds where Leonard was the one moving.
Leonard won the rounds he threw punches. He just didn't throw enough of them.
Leonard's jab nearly took Hearns' head off in the 6th and 7th. Watch the beautiful right that starts the 13th.
He moved the 8th and lost it. Why, because late in the round Leonard threw punches. Watch the 13th and 14th. Hearns was moving.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
Tommy won rounds 1-5. Leonard won rounds 6,7. Rd 8 was a recovery round for Tommy who was 3 yrs away from his peak and sorely in need of some muscle
rds 8, 9,10,11,12, Tommy dazzled, confused, and bedazzled Sugar until the plodding, ineffective Sugarman (and I use that term loosely!) finally caught Tommy at the end of one his haymakers
Was Sugar more skilled? Stronger? Yes. More skilled, probably not except on defense. I knew the next good mover he met would probably beat him
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@TA152H01
seriously, who calls Terry Norris stubby? You invented that name yourself. but it doesnt make up for the fact that Norris was superior to Leonard and that leonard had no clue how to solve his style. anyways, I'm certainly not buying your poor explanation of how Ray would magically draw Terry to him. And if he couldnt? Then Ray is in for a long nite. Becuz how is Ray going to get Terry to stand still for him? How does Ray get Terry to chase Ray? He can't. he couldnt. He DIDN'T
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
But...notice the way TERRY got RAY to move in the way HE wanted. Terry OWNED Ray and made him move the way HE wanted. a great example is in round 7. WHy if I didnt know better I would swear that it was Terry that was the teacher and Ray the student. Terry gets Ray to follow him to the ropes, and as Leonard is THINKS he has him trapped, Terry catches him coming in with a BOOMING jab. This REALLY frustrated Ray like crazy. He wouldnt stand for it and once again fell for Terry's trap, following him
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
to the ropes. Remember this is the SAME round. Now Terry is baiting Ray. As Ray is looking for an opening that will put "glass jawed Norris" away, Terry cuts lose with a blazing, faster than the eye can follow, 1-2 that drops Ray to his knees (2nd knockdown)
I already knew that Terry was the better fighter but the way he toyed with Sugar proves that he owned Sugar and had him in his hip pocket. Sugar Ray was gr8 in his own time but he just didnt have the experience needed to deal w Terry
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Leonard had no business taking this fight. He was great in his time, in my opinion the most complete fighter to step into the ring, but he ruined his legacy by coming back.
He hand picked opponents, either they were too old, or they were not good in the first place. When he finally got in with a top shelf fighter, he was completely outclassed, and embarrassed. He could only beat washouts. It still irks me he gets credit for beating Hagler. He beat a shell.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Leonard had no reflexes, and simply did not have the tools to do anything. When you're in that situation, you have to get in close and nullify as best you can the advantages. He was too slow, with no reflexes, so he had to try to get a lucky shot in. He probably could have knocked Norris out, and he did hurt him to the body, but he had to hit him, and with his reflexes gone, he had to get close and hope for a lucky shot.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Norris would have to find a way inside. He couldn't fight outside against a guy with a 6 inch reach advantage. Plus, he'd have the hand speed deficit, which would make fighting outside impossible.
Norris would have to get inside and stay inside, but it would not be easy. He'd have to use his power/speed combination to try to offset Leonard's superior athleticism. Norris would give up speed, but not much, but he had a bigger punch. He'd lose, but it would be fun.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@TA152H01
why would Terry have to when he can easily make Ray come after him? Again, where's your proof? You have none but I do!
and in reality the fight didnt go the way you're describing. Norris DIDNt have to make his way inside and in fact it was RAY that had to make HIS WAY inside (rd two)
and when he DID get in you know what happened! Terry slapped him down and Ray felt his guts turn to jelly. By round 3 it was basically over after Ray took that uppercut. He then lost his heart
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar He fought a shot fighter, so Leonard had to get try to knock out a weak-chinned fighter, and the best way to nullify advantages is to brawl more.
Young Leonard was much faster, and had much better reflexes than this beaten down version. Thus, he'd have no problem beating Norris from outside, and wouldn't have to chase him. Norris would have to find a way inside of the longer armed fighter, or simply lose round after round by jabs. Or get knocked out by one :-P
TA152H01 8 months ago
Comment removed
Piglatinsuperstar 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Actually, Leonard's jab was important against Hearns. Hagler was much slower. Fast jab always beats a slower jab, just look at Clay/Liston.
Leonard had a picture perfect jab. It was his main weapon against Benitez.
TA152H01 8 months ago
@Piglatinsuperstar Leonard was shot by the time he fought Norris. He had not fought a good fighter in his prime since he came back.
Leonard never fought middleweight, so he wasn't ducking Hagler, and in any event, he had plenty of great fighters in his own weight class. If he had been fighting at Middle, and avoided Hagler that would have been different.
I think Leonard was too talented for Hagler. But, we'll never know.
TA152H01 8 months ago