Are there any pure boxers you'd take over a peak Donald Curry at Welterweight?

First of all, here is a post from 7-19-2008 I posted.

Curry was one of the best 'pound for pound' fighters during the mid-80's. He was welterweight champion between 83-86. Technically he was among the finest fighters of the last 30 years, so fine that many had him marked down as the next Leonard. However, problems making the weight eventually caught up with him when he ran into Honeyghan. He wasn't quite the same fighter after that.

He put together a couple of wins at 154lbs then challenged McCallum for the WBA title. IMO he was getting the better of McCallum for as long as the fight lasted, before pulling out of an exchange with his hands down which left his jaw exposed to a sweeping left hook from McCallum. That really was the final nail in his coffin.

Curry never accomplished what his talent deserved. He was as good a 'punch picker' as you'll ever witness. He wasn't the type of boxer who would be on his bicyle behind then jab. He tended to stand within range behind a high guard, slam home jabs at long distance, work his way inside, pound the body with both hands, and keep his elbows tucked into his ribs. He was equally good inside as he was at long range. Didn't matter to him if it was long range stuff or fighting in a telephone box. His workrate was steady and his punches accurate.

 

Perhaps Gavilan for a lighter hitter, I'm not sure though.

As a technician he was about as good as it gets at his best from what I've seen, I don't really think I would outright favor anyone to simply "outskill" him on his best night.

 

Donny Curry did some great things between 1983 thru 1986, but then he went to hell against Lloyd Honeyghan.... The strain of making 147 for too long did Curry in.... I believe Don Curry ruined his speed and reflexes by starving and straining to stay down at 147 pounds.... In truth, Curry should've moved to 154 immediately following his park job of Milton McCrory in late 1985.... However, in a time machine, I say Kid Gavilan was a better 147 pounder than Curry was, but Curry had better power at 147 pounds... Cheers.....

MR.BILL

 

Well, we need a fighter who's quicker than Curry. Who has an excellent defense, and can match him or better him inside. I can see Curry having problems with an opponent who was very quick on his feet. Because Curry fought out of a very wide stance, usually within range, and wasn't particularly quick at cutting down the ring. That probably complimented his controlled and precise style though.

If we are matching Curry with a superb all-round boxer with nothing serious when it comes to power, then I pick Whitaker or Napoles. Although it's a tall order if they would beat him. Napoles was a decent hitter and Whitaker wasn't exactly as quick around the ring at WW as he was at LW.

 

Even though Curry cameback after his losses to "Honey & McCallum" in '86 and 1987, I thought Donald Curry looked faded and beatable in his title win over Giafranco Rosi in 1988.... The '89 loss to Rene Jaquot on CBS Television was a clear-cut tale of a fighter becoming shot-to-hell..... Curry went straight to hell in boxing after 1989..... Peace...

MR.BILL

 

Yeah, Naploes was. I was more focused on him technically.

 

Whitaker might be the pick for me. Curry's combos were tight and fast, with good power. But his style was read then react. A unique stylist like Whitaker could maybe outpoint him while him was waiting for openings that would very few and far between.

 

LMR was not a puncher but he showed some ability to stop a fight abruptly and he was a good body puncher.

I think he was versatile enough to not try and exclusively box a guy like Curry but to mix it up, and take it to the inside.

Very interesting thread though because apart from his durability Curry was very impressive and had some great wins..I could see why people expected more of him.

The fact he could deal with a bloke like Starling shows just how hard he would be to outbox if you didnt have to power to bring out those durability issues.

 

Yes, and the reason why he stayed at 147lbs was stupid and dumb. Stubborness to give up his titles as he enjoyed being one of only two undisputed champions in boxing at the time, with the other being Hagler. True, and Curry was quoted as saying this when asked why he wasn't moving up as expected. This was before he even fought Honeyghan.

 

I can't see Curry having an easy time with Gavilian, who was slightly more unorthdox and flashy. I think Gavilan has the combinations at mid-range to out-score Curry. And lets not forget this, Curry was a sharp-shooter. His punches weren't thrown with bad intentions regularly, as he simply relied on steadyness combined with accuracy. He wasn't a flurrier like Leonard. He went for quality, rather than quantity. Gavilan would definitely have him covering up when getting off with his own flurries. Yes, Curry covered-up well. But Gavilian would be best countering with these shots, rather than lead of with them, thus not giving Curry time to cover-up. And he went into a shell with ease when required. Gavilan would need to exchange with Curry to be successful in scoring.

 

I'd pick Griffith, Rodriguez, and Gavilan to all beat Curry. All three were iron men. A fight against Whitaker would be much closer with Curry, but i think I'd take Pernell for the win

 

You picked the guys I'd favour over him, though I would give Don an outside chance of knocking Wilfred Benitez out.

Donald Curry had supreme technical precision with his punches and good punching power to boot. He had good speed with his shots as well and very good balance in his prime.

However, he did have some weaknesses and I think fighters like Marlon Starling and Jun-Suk Hwang exposed them when they fought him.

His three chief weaknesses as I see it are:
1. His defence was a little leaky. Not bad by any means, but he could be hit.
2. He wasn't that physically strong. Again, he wasn't weak, but he could be muscled around a bit.
3. He sometimes refused to fight on the retreat when he needed to. He often stood his ground unnecessarily, allowing himself to be hit.

Curry struggled with the raw as hell Hwang, simply because Hwang was able to bully him with his strength and make him uncomfortable. Marlon Starling basically got in Curry's face and refused to budge. He was probably a tad fortunate to wind up with the decision in both the Starling fights imo (had him ahead, but only just).

I can see fighters like Pernell Whitaker and Billy Graham getting on Curry and using their physical strength to offset Curry and not give him the space to operate comfortably. They both have good body attacks, good defense and good pressuring ability to get to Curry and make it difficult for him to operate. They may not necessarily outmuscle him, but they will make him uncomfortable enough that Curry will need to fight in the reverse at stages in the fight, and he'd probably neglect to and find himself getting hit plenty.

No pure boxer type at welterweight has an easy time with Curry though. If I pick the likes of Graham and Pea I pick them to win close decisions.

With Benitez it would be fascinating. Curry has the better offensive ability generally, but Wilfred has that greater defensive ability and could possibly make Curry miss more than he ever has before and land enough to sneak home a win. I think he does, but I'm less confident in that pick than I am with Pea and Graham.