someone please school me on donald curry

He was a lot more skilled and talented than Tito.

One of the more technically talented fighters of the last 30 years, to be quite frank. Curry basically had it all in his brief prime. Handspeed, two fisted power, great accuracy, very tight defense, excellent in-fighting ability, and a high ring IQ.

Lost to Honeyghan in a fight where he was badly off, due to being dead at the weight. Was never the same after. But when he beat Starling, Colin Jones, and McCrory he was awesome.

The 84-85 version of Curry would have beaten every welter in the last 30 years NOT named Leonard, Duran, and Hearns.

In other words, he'd have beaten Tito, DLH, Quartey, Mosley, Cotto, and yes...... Floyd too.

 

There was a time in the mid-80's when he was considered the best P4P in the world, and that was with an aging Marvin Hagler still around. It was hard to argue at the time, really. His victories over Starling X2, then Larocca, then a very dangerous Jones, culminated in the really big unification fight with McCrory. Curry was expected to win, but when he obliterated Milt with that textbook highlight KO the way he did, he was then considered to be on another planet in terms of talent and all-time great potential. He was still young, after all.

I did think at the time that he wasn't as physically dominant against 154-pounders when he made little forays into that division against guys like Green (an inconclusive, abbreviated effort) and Baez, but that was so little to go on in terms of predicting what would happen in that division.

The loss to Honeyghan was stunning, but despite what many say (and I know I will catch some stick from some here, but I'm sorry guys, it's simply a fact), Curry was noticeably different in that bout. He was badly weight drained and Honeyghan put up an energetic enough performance to beat him in that state.

For what it's worth, I do give Lloyd some credit. He still had to beat the man, and he beat him badly. He didn't eke out a decision, he whupped his ass, but there simply were extenuating circumstances. Maybe he would have beaten him anyway; he did have a different style that I think would have been trouble for Curry anyway, but giving him full credit for beating Curry then is giving him a hell of a lot of slack.

Curry never seemed the same after that; his efforts at 154 showed a huge loss of strength and power advantages. He seemed more tentative, and just generally not in the game, as it were. He did beat Rosi for a bauble there, but Rosi was never anything but awkward. Even so, apart from the multiple knockdowns, Rosi did trouble him and throw him off. The Italian was always good at that, though.

 

Check out his fights against Larocca, Jones, Baez, Elio Diaz, McCrory, and the Starling rematch.

All those fights display Don at his prime.

The McCrory fight was his true peak performance though.

That version of Curry was one of the best welters that ever lived.

It's a goddamn CRIME that he's not in the HOF. He definitely accomplished enough for it.

Carlos Palomino is in the HOF, and Palomino wasn't in Curry's league. Didn't accomplish as much either.

 

Don Curry is an example of a chandelier that all of a sudden crashed just like that. He was expected to be the next best WW after Leonard retired, but sadly it wasn't to be. At his best he was probably one of the best textbook boxer alongside Ricardo Lopez.

I fear that he may not be inducted in the HOF soon, but I'm certain he'll get in eventually. Not sure why he shouldn't as he was undisputed at one point, and he was considered as the best fighter for a brief time. He had enough good wins to be considered HOF worthy.