LOL. You act like Cotto was some guy who could pull a win out of the fire. He wasn't... at all. Cotto's BEST performance against a faded Mosley, and he BARELY won that (I had it a draw, personally). Miguel was never on the level that Curry was on 83-85. And Dubblechin's opinion on Curry should be taken with a grain of salt, considering he thinks Curry was no better than Thurman and Danny Garcia.
Cotto having a better career was simply the product of a fighting in era where it's easier to pick up belts. That's all.
The second Starling fight was not close- Curry dominated down the stretch and almost dropped Starling in the last round. And Starling would have a party with Cotto. Mosley better then Curry? Not at welterweight. Curry was faster and hit harder then Cotto at welter. Was taller and also had s longer reach. Curry would stop Cotto.
Well, maybe they'll get in the Hall of Fame a quarter century after their last fights, too, like Donald did. Curry wasn't exactly a first ballot hall of famer. He fought for 17 years. And he had to wait more than 20 years after his last fight to get in. And all people can say was, "Well, he was really good briefly for a year or two." Danny Garcia has more wins over Hall of Famers than Curry does. (It's true.) Curry got in because guys who wasted him started getting in the Hall of Fame. It's not based on anyone Curry beat. The guys people label the worst inductees - like Hatton, Johansson, McGuigan - have more wins over Hall of Famers than Curry does. Curry has none. Curry shouldn't be in there. (Neither should Garcia or Thurman.) But, I digress. Back to the topic.
McGuigan beat a fadung Pedroza. He caught Eusebio at the perfect time, right after Pedroza struggled with the equally faded Jorge Lujuan and was dropped by Gerald Hayes. Hatton caught Tzyu at the perfect time. Curry should have gotten in earlier but didn't have the popularity of Gatti or Mancini or the political favortism of McGuigan, Hatton and Brian Mitchell. Please go on about the hall of famerd Mitchell beat. He may have had the worst aggregate quality of opposition of any long reigning Champion in the 80s, even worse than fellow inductee Mancini. Id put Curry's wins over prime Starling, McCrory and Jones over an end of the line Pedroza and Tzyu. And don't even try to argue Gatti was anywhere near the fighter prime Curry was or beat better competition. Anyway, at least Curry got in, finally. BTW: Nunn should be in ahead of those guys I listed. You're good at making lists and spouting numbers, but short on context. Using proper context speparates those who offer solid analysis and those who offer mediocre analysis - an ability to read between the lines is useful.
You think rating Colin Jones and Milton McCrory as better wins than beating Tszyu or Pedroza is sound analysis? (LOL) Colin Jones wasn't even as good as Dave "Boy" Green. McCrory wasn't as good as Danny Garcia or Keith Thurman, for God's sake. The Curry fans on this site are hilarious. I'm not saying Donald Curry was a bad fighter or anything like that. He was very sound. A classic boxer-puncher. Really nice to watch in the ring. But having nice boxing technique doesn't make you a Hall of Famer in the least. Everyone he fought who was remotely Hall of Fame quality took his head off ... and others who weren't hall of fame quality did, too. Curry was 25 and a welter when Honeyghan stopped him. He was 26 and a super welter when McCallum stopped him. He was 27 when Jacquot outpointed him. He was 29 when Norris and Nunn stopped him. Yeah, Curry looked pretty solid for a couple years around 22 and 24 when he was fighting guys who weren't anything special, but that's about it. Regardless, I think Cotto and Curry would be a good fight. But Cotto wins. And Curry certainly doesn't stop him.
You mean the mythical prime of Curry? When was that exactly? Somewhere between age 23 up until about two weeks after his 25th birthday? Danny Garcia beat Erik Morales nearly eight years ago and Garcia is still a top welterweight knocking guys out. Thurman first won a title close to seven years ago and just lost for the first time to Pacquiao. Is there a brief couple months when Curry may have beaten them? Sure, it's possible. But that's a tight window. Over the seven or eight years Garcia and Thurman have been championship level fighters, would they have beaten Curry? You bet. Curry isn't any better than them. They've actually had more successful runs than Curry had.
Curry kills him. Cotto has always been vulnerable, and to me, has always had that quit in him. Curry, you could argue, is top 3-5 WW of all time based on that short prime of his. Cotto isn't anywhere near that. And he beat an ancient Sergio, who was hobbling to the ring in a knee brace. He took that fight and ducked GGG. So it's not worth mentioning,
No, you could never argue that. Curry may not have been one of the top three welterweights of the freaking 80s. LOL.
Donald Curry's big mistake was falling for Akbar Muhammads spiel about big $$ fast cars Fast women etc & allowing that POS Leonard into his camp Between them they destroyed all that Dave Gorman & Paul Reyes had built
Colin Jones would knockout Davey Green and rather easily. Thurman wouldnt beat a Curry and Im a Thurman fan. Danny Garcia was getting his butt handed to him but KAHN. Milton Mccroy at his best was a darn good boxer. Hell he gave Mccallum a good fight. At welter he could beat Thurman/Garcia- neither one has ever faced 6'1 welter who had a decent pop. And Colin Jones stops BOTH Garcia and Thurman.
