Donald Curry, one of the most if not the most supremely gifted bxoer of his generation; yet very hard to place in terms of the greatest in his divison due to the catastrophic losses to Honeyghan and McCallum. We know that both fights, in different ways were unfortunate. clearly hung around too long at welter and weight drained against Honeyghan (not to take much away from a brilliant Honeyghan performance). Boxing masterclass in many ways against McCallum until the wily Jamaican took brutal advanatge of a lapse in concentration (But thats boxing). Think McCallum has gone on record as putting Curry as perhaps his most difficult opponent. However in terms of judging greatness, these losses have severely diminished his claims in many eyes. Got me thinking though about another measurement of judgement. Take a prime Curry, in terms of skills set, all round technical merits and aura and pitch him against your top 5 welters of all time. Ive done it wirth different combinations of top 5's and for me I could see Curry beat a lot if not most in match up's! By that measurement of judgement, how great was Curry in your eyes?
As I think Sweet Pea or sweet_scientist (it was a sweet) has said before take a prime Curry against any of the great but lighter hitters of the division and you got a bloody good fight. But at the end of the day he still lacks the proven durability, mental strength and other intangibles that see him being that high on the welter rankings. H2H he is a weapon...amazing technical ability and natural talent..but he just didnt get to show it consistently enough because of those other things he lacks..
I think its a goddamn shame that Curry isnt in the HOF. Palimino is in there, and with all due respect to Carlos... but Curry was a much better fighter than Palimino, and accomplished more. Head-to-head.... I can see a prime Curry beating ANY welters in history w/the exceptions of Robinson, Leonard, and Hearns.
His hand speed could be fantastic; a sharp shooter if I ever saw one, but, as already said, he lack of proven durability means he can never be ranked THAT high H2H. But I don't feel a case for Curry needs to be made. He would probably make the lower-end of most people's Top 100 P4P list, and that's a fair enough position. I probably have him at about 95, though on overally ability he's right up there. Shane Mosley would give him worries nowadays due to his ability to take a punch and fire back hard shots of his own. But I couldn't see many others giving him problems. Maybe Williams due to his never-say-die attitude, but we've never seen Williams hit with anything like Curry hit people with. His K.O of McCroy is beautiful; the first left is so fast you need slow-mo to see it in flight, the subsequent race across to ring to finish off the stricken McCory is savage. Good fighter, forgotten by some, remembered by those who know :good
I think Curry would beat up the current Mosley. The prime Mosley of 00-01 would be a tough fight for Curry.
I just think Mosley's durability and persistance would be a nightmare for Curry. Although Colin Jones was always a handful and Curry handled him. But Mosley is a different proposition, he's very fast.
I may be biased because Don Curry the Lone Star Cobra was a great great favorite of mine. I was privileged to see many of his fights. Despite the catastrophic losses to Honeyghan and McCallum I don't think it is debatable that Curry was a great Welterweight Champion. I think the real problem is that Curry was so dominant and absolutely beautiful to watch that it seemed as if he may at one stage have been the best ever. He fought a great level of competition when he was dominant and when he was no longer dominant. His record would be viewed as a very fine one if other fighters had it but as Azumah 1 rightly points out the manner of the Honeyghan and McCallum losses sort of diminish. Quite frankly I think he would have knocked out ODLH both of them at their peak however that is not the point. When I came to rank the top 10 Welterweights in history I was surprised that I did not put him in though he would probably beat some of those I have in the top 10. I think the issue maybe as Fleaman says about durability(not that he had a bad chin) by this I mean intestinal fortitude. I remember 2 stories about Don Curry after his career was over in one he was being interviewed and basically he admitted that when people viewed as pound for pound the best he just never thought of himself like that. The other relates to Lloyd Honeyghan seeing a figure in a gym then realising it was Don Curry. Honeyghan goes up to him to say hello and Curry sees him and says man you ruined my career and walks off. Strange "eh". In the final analysis as a fan of Curry I think he was a great fighter but unfortunately and painfully he was a really for what proved to be a painfully short time. It is for this reason we who all love boxing should treasure a talent like PBF for the time we have him.
Mosley still has fast hands... but nothing like he had in his prime. Of course he looked fast against the cheating sloth Margarito, but Curry was lightyears quicker than Margarito. I mean just look at the success Cotto had vs Mosley. Curry was quicker, more powerful, and more skilled than Cotto. And not to mention bigger and stronger. I'd give the Mosley from the 1st DLH fight a chance against Curry, but not the current Shane. Just my opinion.
Personally I think Curry would have a chance of stopping the peak Mosley at Welterweight. As good as Mosley is I am not sure he beats a paek Marlon Starling or Simon Brown. People think Mosley is a master boxer when he really is a very fast strong fighter.
I think you're underrating Shane's great chin. I dont think any welter in history stops Shane, except for the Hitman. And Shane beats Simon Brown. Brown was tough as hell, but Mosley's handspeed would have been too much for him. Mosley-Starling is a pick em IMO.
I think Starling would land the cleaner shots on Shane but Shane would win a decision through workrate and flashiness. I agree; Cotto did outbox Shane at times and Curry would have to be favoured against Shane because of this.
Yes Shane has a great chin without a shadow of doubt but I would not be surprised if Curry's power could take him out. The thing is Shane is fighter and I don't see him changing against Brown and Brown may overpower Shane.
When Don Curry was good, he was very, very good, but he came up short in some key matches which have previously been overlooked on this thread. In their first meeting, Marlon Starling kept establishing a superior position on the inside, but then failed to let his fists go for some unknown reason. Otherwise, the Magic Man kept performing his inane, "Starling Stomp," and making funny bird calls with that stupid grin on his face. It really looked to me as though Marlon could have won that bout if only he'd tried. (I give Curry full credit for his showing in their 15 round rematch however.) The tough but very limited Jun-Suk Hwang decked him with a sneaky right (a fact conveniently omitted by boxwreck for a long time) off the ropes. (Boxwreck describeds it as an uppercut, but that's not what I recall. Footage?) The Korean gave him some defensive difficulties, and lost by seven to eight points on all three cards over 15 rounds for the vacant WBA WW Title. Considering the fact that this crowning was held in Curry's own Fort Worth, this is not an especially impressive margin of victory. (In Fargo, Virgil Hill usually shut his challengers out.) Although the Curry family chin could explain his defeats to Honeyghan and McCallum (which I did not see at the time), the way he was decisioned by Rene Jacquot (which I did view on a live broadcast) bugs the hell out of me. There's no way Jacquot should have been able to compete with Curry on points, let alone dethrone him, even in Grenoble. (And none of those judges were French.) In his first title defense, Roger Stafford made things easy for him by foolishy spending all the time he should have used warming up in prayer instead, coming in cold and creating a novel excuse for losing a critical title match quickly. He was good, but great? Palomino took an impressive battering from Duran, but ruggedly went the distance even though he no longer really had the hunger to regain the title. I'm not convinced Don Curry would have made it through ten rounds in the same situation. (Along with Montreal, Palomino is credited as being Duran's finest WW performance. Carlos deserves some acknowledgement for the resistance he provided in showcasing Duran to the cover of SI, "Boxing's Big Week.")
No fighter is perfect. Personally I think Curry outboxed Hwang pretty easily aside from the KD, and he clearly beat Starling in the rematch. Curry was head and shoulders better than Palimino. You give Palimino more credit than Curry for taking a BEATING against Duran? Well then I guess Davey Moore is greater than Curry also, huh? Who did Palimino actually beat? Davey Green was giving Carlos HELL for 10 rounds, until his eye closed and Palimino landed a monster hook that ended it. But still he struggled in that fight. On the flip side... Curry destroyed Colin Jones, who was a bigger n stronger Davey Green. Palimino would have lost to Starling, nevermind Curry. Curry's resume is better than Palimino's, he accomplished more by unifying the division.. and h2h.. Curry would have beaten Palimino by commanding decision.
My top 5 would probably feature Robinson, Leonard, Hearns, Walker, and Gavilan (not necessarily in that order), perhaps Armstrong somewhere in or near there. I don't see Curry beating any of them, and I think most of them would whup him very decisively.
