Originally Posted by redrooster
you probably still believe ray won two titles in one night two even though he only had one opponent in front of him who owned just one title.
the ray leonard of october 1980 as compared with the ray leonard from september of the following year? thanks for proving my point.
duran was ill prepared for that one and shouldn't have been fighting. you need to see the inside man about that one-randy gordon. so of course leonard is going to look good, very good. i can see why it would cause some to think he was so good, so fast that he was a blur next to duran, making him the best fighter of the last 30 years. if and only if duran was healthy.
but we all know he wasn't. Hearns was though. a little light but more mobile than the bloated, plodding duran of new orleans.
the hearns fight, leonard was far less impressive because he was facing an opponent with some movement and good speed.
it wasn't the kind of speed that norris possessed. no fighter had that kind of speed-not even meldrick taylor himself but tommy still enough speed and good basic boxing skills to trouble leonard.
Tommy had at the time, a good jab and right cross combinations along with some body work. but no left hook the way norris used it which is the punch he used to destroy leonard.
you say ray leonard was gone or at least that's what you're trying to prove to yourself. you can't prove it to me because i've proven it false time and time and time again and will continue to do so in the future. I'll bet you can't even tell me what was wrong with leonard prior to the fight with norris.
you need proof if you're going to debate with critics like me. I've seen all of the modern greats in decline and i've been able to catch the signs of deterioration, when they start to digress. they say the first thing to go are the legs of a fighter and from what i saw in uno mas was a man who showed the legs of a man in his early 20's. ray leonard was a well preserved athlete if nothing else. all the years of not fighting kept him from an early decline. but even so, he was no match for my man Norris.
you're upset because my man drilled him no problem and ray didn't know how to fight back. even tho he was a legend and norris was nobody at the time, it was norris who fought like the legend. leonard fought as best as he knows how but he isn't in norris' class as a fighter and remember who has the bragging rights.
I also think you have a lot of nerve to claim leonard has bragging rights over Hagler because he won a disputed split decision and yet deny Norris' claims after slamming him round after round. I certainly wouldn't have the balls to make the claims you make. where do you get all your nerve?
Youve seen all the greats in decline,yes?Norris,s big wins over a Don Curry ,who had lost two of his last four fights,and after losing to Norris retired,,a thirty five year old Leonard who had struggled to draw with Hearns and hadnt fought in over a year,a thirty yearold weight drained Mugabi,who also retired after their fight ,these are fighters that were in decline,I dont see anything special in Norris,s resume,his period at the time was very brief ,he came along at the right time when better fighters were on the way out,thems the breaks ,but I dont see an ATG.