Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-19-2008, 10:29 PM   #16
Sister Sledge
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Based Land
Posts: 9,061
vCash: 75
Default Re: Marlon Starling vs Terry Norris

At 147, Starling could conceivably have knocked out Terry.
Sister Sledge is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 02-19-2008, 10:41 PM   #17
redrooster
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,508
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marlon Starling vs Terry Norris

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sister Sledge
Starling gave away a lot of fights because he clowned around quite a bit. But the Bumphus fight was stopped prematurely on an accidental cut before it was finished. Starling never got the benefit of the doubt with referees because of his style, but the decision could have gone to him instead of Bumphus. He was a great fighter.
You think he was a great fighter?!?
redrooster is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2008, 07:47 PM   #18
Cobra33
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,164
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marlon Starling vs Terry Norris

Actually the Bumphus bout had live scoreing in between rounds so the corners knew what the score was.Duva actually didn't try to fix the cut on Bumphus because Bumphus had a slight lead.Starling would have ended up stopping Bumphus latter in that bout if it had continued.
And Red rooster answer me this:Is Starling a better boxer then Derrick Kelly?BECAUSE KELLY BEAT THE HELL OUT OF NORRIS.EVEN SHOOK HIM A COUPLE OF TIMES.
Cobra33 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2008, 11:15 PM   #19
redrooster
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,508
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marlon Starling vs Terry Norris

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cobra33
Actually the Bumphus bout had live scoreing in between rounds so the corners knew what the score was.Duva actually didn't try to fix the cut on Bumphus because Bumphus had a slight lead.Starling would have ended up stopping Bumphus latter in that bout if it had continued.
And Red rooster answer me this:Is Starling a better boxer then Derrick Kelly?BECAUSE KELLY BEAT THE HELL OUT OF NORRIS.EVEN SHOOK HIM A COUPLE OF TIMES.

Derrick Kelly - Norris. Has anyone seen this because I dont know the details of the loss. If it was early in his career I can excuse the loss. Many of the greats like Norris have been thru this; Monzon, Galindez, Dempsey, Greb, Tony Sibson, Benny Leonard. The list is endless.

I seriously doubt that Terry was prime time when he took that early loss and in fact you can hear this mentioned by boxing scholar Jim Lampley before the start of the Taylor fight. Otherwise, how could Norris have defeated Taylor unless he had dramatically improved over the years? How could Norris have toppled legends Ray Leonard, Mugabi, and Curry with ridiculous ease? Improvement, that's how.

Now let's look at the case of Marlon Starling in prime time, also loser to Pedro Villela. How in the world can anyone say Starling is great? I mean the guy was a habitual loser! Just the fact that he was behind on points to Bumphus tells you how pathetic and anemic he was on offense. This is the man they say would beat a destroyer like Cuevas? Cuevas would ANNIHILATE this bum!!!

And to say he could somehow knockout Norris when his two time conqueror, Don Curry is just plain fantasy.
redrooster is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2008, 11:30 PM   #20
Sister Sledge
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Based Land
Posts: 9,061
vCash: 75
Default Re: Marlon Starling vs Terry Norris

Quote:
Originally Posted by redrooster
You think he was a great fighter?!?
I never said he was a great fighter. He could have been great, but he let some fights slip away that he should have won.
Sister Sledge is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2008, 11:31 PM   #21
Sister Sledge
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Based Land
Posts: 9,061
vCash: 75
Default Re: Marlon Starling vs Terry Norris

Quote:
Originally Posted by redrooster
Derrick Kelly - Norris. Has anyone seen this because I dont know the details of the loss. If it was early in his career I can excuse the loss. Many of the greats like Norris have been thru this; Monzon, Galindez, Dempsey, Greb, Tony Sibson, Benny Leonard. The list is endless.

I seriously doubt that Terry was prime time when he took that early loss and in fact you can hear this mentioned by boxing scholar Jim Lampley before the start of the Taylor fight. Otherwise, how could Norris have defeated Taylor unless he had dramatically improved over the years? How could Norris have toppled legends Ray Leonard, Mugabi, and Curry with ridiculous ease? Improvement, that's how.

Now let's look at the case of Marlon Starling in prime time, also loser to Pedro Villela. How in the world can anyone say Starling is great? I mean the guy was a habitual loser! Just the fact that he was behind on points to Bumphus tells you how pathetic and anemic he was on offense. This is the man they say would beat a destroyer like Cuevas? Cuevas would ANNIHILATE this bum!!!

And to say he could somehow knockout Norris when his two time conqueror, Don Curry is just plain fantasy.
Styles make fights, and I think Starling's style would have been difficult for Terry to solve.
Sister Sledge is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2008, 11:31 PM   #22
redrooster
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,508
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marlon Starling vs Terry Norris

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sister Sledge
I never said he was a great fighter. He could have been great, but he let some fights slip away that he should have won.
So based on that, you think he's somehow going to beat on Cuevas?
redrooster is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2008, 11:33 PM   #23
Sister Sledge
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Based Land
Posts: 9,061
vCash: 75
Default Re: Marlon Starling vs Terry Norris

Quote:
Originally Posted by redrooster
So based on that, you think he's somehow going to beat on Cuevas?
Cuevas wasn't a great fighter. The only thing he had was great power. Starling could have nullified Pipino's power and made him pay in return.
Sister Sledge is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2008, 11:33 PM   #24
Sister Sledge
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Based Land
Posts: 9,061
vCash: 75
Default Re: Marlon Starling vs Terry Norris

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sister Sledge
Cuevas wasn't a great fighter. The only thing he had was great power. Starling could have nullified Pipino's power and made him pay in return.
Cuevas also did not have a granite chin.
Sister Sledge is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2008, 11:34 PM   #25
Sister Sledge
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Based Land
Posts: 9,061
vCash: 75
Default Re: Marlon Starling vs Terry Norris

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sister Sledge
Cuevas also did not have a granite chin.
The main thing is that Starling was just the better fighter overall. He would have made Cuevas look silly.
Sister Sledge is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2008, 11:36 PM   #26
Sister Sledge
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Based Land
Posts: 9,061
vCash: 75
Default Re: Marlon Starling vs Terry Norris

Quote:
Originally Posted by redrooster
Derrick Kelly - Norris. Has anyone seen this because I dont know the details of the loss. If it was early in his career I can excuse the loss. Many of the greats like Norris have been thru this; Monzon, Galindez, Dempsey, Greb, Tony Sibson, Benny Leonard. The list is endless.

I seriously doubt that Terry was prime time when he took that early loss and in fact you can hear this mentioned by boxing scholar Jim Lampley before the start of the Taylor fight. Otherwise, how could Norris have defeated Taylor unless he had dramatically improved over the years? How could Norris have toppled legends Ray Leonard, Mugabi, and Curry with ridiculous ease? Improvement, that's how.

Now let's look at the case of Marlon Starling in prime time, also loser to Pedro Villela. How in the world can anyone say Starling is great? I mean the guy was a habitual loser! Just the fact that he was behind on points to Bumphus tells you how pathetic and anemic he was on offense. This is the man they say would beat a destroyer like Cuevas? Cuevas would ANNIHILATE this bum!!!

And to say he could somehow knockout Norris when his two time conqueror, Don Curry is just plain fantasy.
Norris got kayoed by a faded Simon Brown, a man that Starling beat in his prime.
Sister Sledge is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2008, 12:17 AM   #27
redrooster
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,508
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marlon Starling vs Terry Norris

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sister Sledge
Norris got kayoed by a faded Simon Brown, a man that Starling beat in his prime.
You said it-styles make fights. Brown was an all offense fighter. Starling was an all defense fighter. If they had rankings for offense for fighters as they do in football, Starling would have one of the worst numbers.

So, how is Starling going to manage this win with an anemic offense? He cant counter Norris because Terry is the guy with the speed. Starling didnt have much in the way of mobility. What does that tell you? I'm sorry to tell you this mate, but Moochie doesnt stand in this contest.

let's talk about great fighters and what makes them great. What do you think makes starling great? Is it the way he holds his gloves up high and lets the other guy pound them? Is it the way he sometimes stomps his foot on the canvas? What else was there? Honestly, I find nothing inspirational about him.

When CBS built up his fight with Curry in 82, I struggled just to get thru the finish of the fight. All that buildup for nothing. I could understand the weak performance from Curry-he was fighting with the flu but what's Starling's excuse? he still lost! I concluded this guy Starling is nothing but a bust. No offense, but he sucks!

How many defenses did he make on his title? Cuevas made ten over a time span of four years. Starling? Just a couple because he was destined to be a cheese champ. Could Starling have ever been champion in an era where there was just one champion? Not in Leonard's era, nor Napoles', Cokes', etc,,,

Cuevas on the other hand dominated. When has Starling ever dominated? he didnt even dominate Bumphus. So it's not enough to say "He had the style to beat this guy or that guy" when you got no offense going even if he is technically okay (more or less)

Sure, lots of guys including his challengers were better all around fighters than Cuevas but after getting their heads and ribs beat on for a few rounds, skill and ability didn't get the job done and bring them the title. Power and ferocity did.

Harold Weston: Loser after 9 rounds and came away with broken ribs.

Billy Backus, former world champion: Defeated in 1 round and came out with broken ribs and eye socket.

Pete Ranzany: thorougly trashed after two one sided rounds

Angel Espada: 2 rounds, 11 rounds, 9 rounds-numerous contusions, bruises and lumps around the eye, broken ribs, you name it.

Cuevas was a destroyer. Starling is a lifeless defensive fighter, a cutie with an anemic offense and nothing more.

Last edited by Cachibatches; 02-26-2007 at 03:53 AM.
redrooster is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2008, 01:02 AM   #28
Sister Sledge
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Based Land
Posts: 9,061
vCash: 75
Default Re: Marlon Starling vs Terry Norris

Quote:
Originally Posted by redrooster
You said it-styles make fights. Brown was an all offense fighter. Starling was an all defense fighter. If they had rankings for offense for fighters as they do in football, Starling would have one of the worst numbers.

So, how is Starling going to manage this win with an anemic offense? He cant counter Norris because Terry is the guy with the speed. Starling didnt have much in the way of mobility. What does that tell you? I'm sorry to tell you this mate, but Moochie doesnt stand in this contest.

let's talk about great fighters and what makes them great. What do you think makes starling great? Is it the way he holds his gloves up high and lets the other guy pound them? Is it the way he sometimes stomps his foot on the canvas? What else was there? Honestly, I find nothing inspirational about him.

When CBS built up his fight with Curry in 82, I struggled just to get thru the finish of the fight. All that buildup for nothing. I could understand the weak performance from Curry-he was fighting with the flu but what's Starling's excuse? he still lost! I concluded this guy Starling is nothing but a bust. No offense, but he sucks!

How many defenses did he make on his title? Cuevas made ten over a time span of four years. Starling? Just a couple because he was destined to be a cheese champ. Could Starling have ever been champion in an era where there was just one champion? Not in Leonard's era, nor Napoles', Cokes', etc,,,

Cuevas on the other hand dominated. When has Starling ever dominated? he didnt even dominate Bumphus. So it's not enough to say "He had the style to beat this guy or that guy" when you got no offense going even if he is technically okay (more or less)

Sure, lots of guys including his challengers were better all around fighters than Cuevas but after getting their heads and ribs beat on for a few rounds, skill and ability didn't get the job done and bring them the title. Power and ferocity did.

Harold Weston: Loser after 9 rounds and came away with broken ribs.

Billy Backus, former world champion: Defeated in 1 round and came out with broken ribs and eye socket.

Pete Ranzany: thorougly trashed after two one sided rounds

Angel Espada: 2 rounds, 11 rounds, 9 rounds-numerous contusions, bruises and lumps around the eye, broken ribs, you name it.

Cuevas was a destroyer. Starling is a lifeless defensive fighter, a cutie with an anemic offense and nothing more.
Boy! You really don't like Starling, do you? I thought beat Curry in the first fight, but the judges gave Donald the fight.
Sister Sledge is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2008, 12:28 PM   #29
Cobra33
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,164
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marlon Starling vs Terry Norris

Ray Leonard-past his prime
Don Curry-past his prime
John Mugabi-past his prime



I believe Norris also almost lost to Jorge Vaca.As for the Kelly bout Kelly was known as a light puncher but yet shook Norris.

As for this bout I think Norris would win based on his movement and combination punching.I think his movement would really trouble Starling and Starling really didn't have true knockout power.He was a very strong boxer on the inside but his power was below average.

Last edited by Chaney; 02-28-2007 at 11:04 AM.
Cobra33 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2008, 02:04 PM   #30
redrooster
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,508
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Marlon Starling vs Terry Norris

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sister Sledge
Boy! You really don't like Starling, do you? I thought beat Curry in the first fight, but the judges gave Donald the fight.
He didnt come close to winning that fight. because of his incompetence and ineptitude he couldnt handle a boy fighting with the flu. "Judges gave Curry the fight" Give me a break.

Last edited by gneus17; 02-28-2007 at 11:39 AM.
redrooster is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013