Sugar Ray Leonard was a 3-1 favorite against Terry Norris

Good point. Not sure the `experts` were looking at the reality ... Got caught up in the prime Leonard. Be forewarned however... There will be people on here who will insist that Norris beat a prime SRL !!

 

Fixed.

 

It's called nostalgia. Same reason De La Hoya was favored over Pacquiao.

 

I´m not surprised...I wouldn´t say is due to nostalgia only, though....

 

resume, record, experience, titles. unbeaten in 11 yrs, etc, etc.all he lacked was a win over that one opponent with the missing ingredient, speed

Sugar may've had the experience & the titles but Norris had the SPEED

Norris' SPEED was Sugar's kryptonite!

think about it, it's hard to adjust to an opponent when he beats u to the punch 98% of the time

if u look at all of Sugar's previous opponents, they always gave him the time he needed to box at a leisurely pace and look for openings. Norris didnt.

while Sugar POSED, Norris PITCHED

he had never seen that kind of SPEED

the press turned their head the other way when it came to his carefully picked opposition, not realizing he was ripe for a devestating defeat

They

This content is protected

thought that past success against of this type would lead him to success over a more advanced level fighter of the Nunn/Norris caliber

but when it came to speed, Norris had no peer. I knew Sugar's days were numbered once the contract was signed. I had rearly been so sure of an outcome I thought. It would be like putting a cat in the bird cage

combine Terry's long range skills together with his get in N get out quick moves to the inside and Terry multiplied the parameters of his powers immeasurably!!

so I knew this would translate to a blowout for Norris

once the bout got underway, many thought Norris would freeze up and get Gardenitis.

but they had yet to find out what I ALREADY knew! When Terry Norris dont want to get hit, he AIN'T!

Norris played it smart, keeping just out of range of Sugar's combos, frustrating him. on offense, once Terry unwided, he put Sugar back on his heels. What could I say? Sugar cant handle young smart, fast fighters who are as good on defense as they are offense :yep

On account of Terry's defense, Sugar couldnt reach him, and with Terry's lightning fast reflexes, he couldnt keep Terry from hitting him

 

only problem with that anaysis is that Sugar didnt have all the losses that Oscar had

 

Betting odds have nothing to do with the "boxing public" or "experts."

They have to do with the betting public and oddsmakers -- and the job of those oddsmakers is to get money on both sides. The house collects 10 percent off the amount bet by the losers, and those losers pay off the winners if the money bet is even.

The betting public knew little about Norris in comparison to SRL, who was an icon well known by the general public as an ATG. He had pulled off great victories, even seeming miraculous ones (coming out of retirement to beat Hagler without a tuneup), over and over. Norris was known to the boxing public, but not really to the general public. He was just another guy.

You see this all the time with betting odds -- the Yankees are favored by great odds, same with Notre Dame football, the New England Patriots, etc, because the betting houses know a certain amount of the public will always put money down on them to win. The odds are tilted to make them bigger faves so people will put money down the other way.

 

neither had I seen any one from the press make the right pick

 

Because they picked Hagler before that.

Ray Leonard, controversially or not, pulled it out of the hat then. Maybe they thought he could do so again.

 

Ray fooled himself thinking he was still good, and Norris was a terrible matchup for him also, and then Ray comes in at 154 where he looks weak. Also Ray did not fight enough in the 1980's to guarantee fighting a young guy like Norris. He knew Duran and Hearns and that helped him beat them.
Incidentally a few months after Norris vs. Leonard, Thomas Hearns wins the 175 pound title over undefeated Virgil Hill who had 10 title defenses. It showed how Tommy who put his all into fighting the whole decade of the 1980's came out experienced and ring saavy,and his hard work and many fights got him the win. Ray fighting on and off in the late part of the decade backfired on him. I thought these two results meant more than just Ray diminishing before Hearns, because Tommy had about 15 more fights than Ray at this time. and even with wear and tear, Tommy's experience helped him win where Ray could not have. Sorry I went down this path, but when Norris is mentioned it reminds me of 1991.

 

Leonard was the miracle man. And at seemingly a 'young 34', he was fighting a good fighter, but he was hardly Hagler...

Boxing history is littered with similar occurrences: Holmes/Ali, Sullivan/Corbett et al.

Long term boxing fans tend to be a nostalgic lot, we like to think our heroes have got one more brilliant performance in them.

 

Rooster, Knew I could count on you

 

In their respective primes. SRL stops Norris late in the fight . Norris` chin would lead to his ultimate undoing. Thats what always holds him back in all time great talks, even mediocre fighters could get to his very shaky chin. SRL , was not prime nor was he fighting enough to be the SRL of 1981 ...Rooster, Norris didn`t want to get hit by Jackson,Mullings, Brown or Boudoani but he did ! And when he did, you know the rest

 

DLH and Leonard while past their best hadn't shown any signs they were done yet. Both struggled making weight and being weakened like that took the fight of them in what would have been tricky fights anyway