He was past his prime during the Norris bout. Ray had a legendary career and Norris did not. Elusive now that's hilarious considering how many times Norris got knocked out in HIS younger years.
Though it pains me to disagree with you, I watched Ray Leonard in his previous bout and saw no visible signs of decline In fact, Ray no longer had the ring rust he had going into the Hagler fight and further, Sugar was at his best fighting weight - 154, which only increased his speed the weaknesses we suspected watching the Bonds and Hearns fights in 1981, only Norris had this level of speed & versatility to capitalize on. Terry had so many weapons available to him that he sometimes didnt know how to utilize them all So as great as Ray Leonard was, he never could handle someone of the level of a Terry Norris. No disgrace He couldnt handle him from the outside because Norris wasnt a stationary fighter. That means, when Norris didnt want to be hit, Ray Leonard could not MAKE Norris stay in a stationary position (ala Dave Green, Don Lalonde) neither could he crowd him because as you saw, when he closed in on Terry, Terry simply tripled his hand speed And defensively, Norris knew how to tie his man up. What could Leonard do??? I truly believe that on that night, no living being could cope with so much limitless talent in the same way, Pernell would not make himself available for Ray to land on but i think it would be close this is quite a tough fight for Leonard stylistically
A 34 year old fighter is no longer in his peak years. Leonard struggled with Hearns getting dropped twice and Hearns was on his last legs. As much a as you like to wax on about how great Terry was its funny watching him get battered by Derrick Kelly and then the defensive master gets knocked completely out in two rounds by Jackson. And worse at the PRIME age of 26 he gets crushed by Brown who was also on the downside of his prime. Nobody ever knocked out a Leonard in his prime years did they? Benitez. Duran. Hearns. Kalue. Hagler. Now put 4 names of boxers that Terry beat even remotely close to that. And here's the catch - 3 of those fighters entered unbeaten going in vs Ray. So make sure the fighters you list 3 are unbeaten prior to facing Leonard.
And here's the funny thing. I'm a Hearns fan. I'm from Rays area and while I was young I remember certain boxing trainers around the area commenting how Ray was getting handled in sparring and that him moving down was a huge mistake. There was a local up and coming pro in the area that was supposedly just smashing Leonard on a routine basis and they had to basically stop Ray from sparring with him- I can't remember who it was.
You keep forgetting Ray Leonard didnt beat Hagler and when DIDNT he struggle with hearns? He struggled with him in 1981 when he was being outboxed The point I'm making is that Ray had actually IMPROVED since the Hagler bout Consider these facts: The ring rust was gone, and in the third Duran fight, his legs were as good as ever. His combinations as sharp and fast as ever these are facts that we CANNOT ignore and since the number of bouts was not nearly the number we see in other 34 year old boxers, Ray had the best of both worlds That is, 34 year old faded fighters are reserved only for those with double or more the number Ray had Thus, If ray had lost anything, it was negligible and not discernable to the eye No, it's just as they say in boxing "STYLES" Sure he was outclassed by the speedy Norris. A fighter, even one as great as Leonard, cannot make a faster opponent slow down which is why he lost to Norris but Pernell is not as fast as Norris which is why I am particularly fascinated with the Pernell V. Ray Leonard I feel that Ray was awesome, like yourself, but how would he deal with Pernell's tricks and versatility. It seems that Pernell had progressed quite a bit since his first title fight
No, I am not the Rooster. the real Redrooster was killed in a late 2019 bar fight My real name is not Mark Dunham but Jorge (pronounced hore - Hee) Jarin
He bested Hagler end of story. Duran from the third fight that just followed Ray around the ring? Hearns was beyond his prime and still dropped Leonard Twice and they both put on an awesome show but both weren't in thier primes. Right. I can see it now: a fighter actually improves at 34 because of what exactly,? So I guess Norris in his thirties was twice the fighter he was at say 27 ? Ray was shot. He was getting pulled out of sparring because he was getting handled. He should have never dropped down that far at that age. And Norris STILL couldn't finish a shadow of Ray off.
Ray beats him comfortably. Pea is probably smart and slick enough to last the distance so he has that going for him.
Ray was not shot for the reasons I just gave. This was evident in the 3rd Duran fight. Duran as you know, had just won the middleweight championship of the world (WBC version) Duran could not contain Leonard because of his movement and ray won a lopsided decision Had Ray struggled or taken too much punishment from Duran, then you could say Leonard had faded going into the Norris fight And in the same way Leonard outsped Duran, Norris outsped Leonard It would be nice to add a FUTURE great like Norris to his resume It's convenient for someone displeased with the outcome or concerned with the blemish left behind tarnishing Leonard's career to say such things like "Ray was shot" but I have to look at the facts, instead of relying on emotion to insist on something that isnt true
for this same reason, I favor Pernell I think Leonard's best chance is to go after the knockout but I dont know how Ray is going to reach him. He gives you nothing to hit
Why in your opnion is Benitez overrated? What advantages does Whitaker's "Style" have over prime R.Leonard. Because the realities are Leonard met a superslick fast southpaw in Bonds and beat him convincingly, he also defeated a master defensive fighter in Benitez, May Sr. Was noted for his speed, Leonard beat him convincingly, another fighter noted for his fast twitch muscles and speed , Andy Price Leonard damn near killed him, none of those fighters were as talented as Whitaker ( with the very possible exception of Benitez) but they were all very good, and well schooled. Meanwhile Whitaker never faced anyone in his career that was the total package of speed, power, defensive ability, skills and aggression as prime Leonard. Also this. Whitaker was about 5'6 with a reach less than 70". The average height of the above fighters were about 5'10" over a 70 inch reach. A very substantial difference. Whitaker would be at a hugh disadvantage in almost every way possible against Leonard.
Duran lost to PAT LAWLOR his next fight. And then dropped decisions to legendary Vinny Paz. But let me school you how awful Duran was in the third fight: Out of 588 punches thrown in that fight by Duran he landed..............84. Leonard was worse but landed more: threw 438 but landed 227. The fight in itself was just an awful fight by two greats looking to make some quick money while there names were both relevant. Duran never won a meaningful fight after the 3rd Leonard fight. Leonard never won a meaningful fight either after the third Duran fight. Problem with Terry is his chin was just sooooo bad. All the skill in the world but was undisciplined at times which resulted in him getting starched a number of times. Against the Fab four he beats none of them in there primes - different class of fighters. And you still haven't given me Terry's top four wins why is that?