Could Sugar Ray Leonard be top 10 fighter of all time?

Norris lacked a lot of what made Tommy an all time great fighter.

 

That's not what you said about the press here: :nono

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=6968578&postcount=45

You lose, again.

 

No more than Julian Jackson did. :nono

That's not what you indicated here:

:deal

 

According to you, yes.

That's how many years with no losses Hagler was coming off when he fought Leonard.

 

like what? Norris IS an all time great. In fact, I rank him higher than I do Tommy

 

His power, his physical advantages, his resilience, his resume, his achievements, his longevity, his ability to compete across weight classes, etc., etc.

 

alright let's compare

Power-both are comparable tho Terry had more versatility. Both TH and TN dropped SRL twice in one fight tho Terry had the better left hook and that uppercut was just stunning. Ask Ray Leonard! Edge: Norris

Physical advantages-in reach the edge goes to Tommy but this just means that Terry had better balance

resilience-Tommy's resilience not the best as he was bombed out early at two middleweight fights. TN just the loss to Jackson-edge: even

Resume: Norris easily conquered Ray which Tommy never did. Norris also setting the record for defenses at 154. Tommy has a lot of catching up to do here. Edge: Norris


Achievements: Terry also wins in this catagory as Terry achieved the record in beating superstars and setting defenses. Edge: Norris

Longevity: Edge to Hearns

Defense. Edge: Norris

Speed. Edge: Norris

Versatility. Edge: Norris

mental toughness: Terry shined when faced with the biggest challenges of his career. Hearns failed so edge to Norris

Etc, etc. I'm sorry but you just arent making yourself very clear.

To sum things up, Norris has won 7 of 10 crucial categories so I guess that means you were mistaken. If we werent making comparisons between TN & Th, Tommy would stand out more but as you can see, TN is a definite cut above. And i didnt even mention hand speed

 

Terry Norris a better resume than Tommy Hearns? Put down the crack pipe!

 

Duran beat Marcel in 1970, Moore in 1983, Barkley in 1989, Castro in 1997, and incredibly avenged one of his four stoppage defeats by decisioning Lawlor in 2000, on his 49th birthday. That's three decades of world class performances. (Even his debut opponent in 1968 was no slouch, but somebody who would mess up the face of a peak Gomez over a decade later.) He defended the lightweight title a dozen times, concluding that reign with a decisive unification bout. Where was SRL in 1970, 1983, 1997 and 2000? Even when factoring in what happened between them H2H in Ray's favor, Roberto's career overlap is of tsunami proportions, and he kept coming back from defeats of a nature that SRL could not recover from when Norris and Camacho inflicted them on Ray. No human forced Duran into retirement. It took a car crash to finally finish him off. (Otherwise, that filthy fat old ******* might have made Golota look like an amateur in laying out Valuev, the Klitschkos, Lennox, Haye, ect...)

Camacho took out and retired SRL, but got what many believe was a gift decision over Duran in 1996. El Cholo was 50 years old when Hector failed in his second attempt to stop him or even put him on the deck .

Ray's lack of longevity is dismal and confusing by comparison, especially when considering his style and the fact that he was never in less than top physical condition, and always began his training camps weighing less than the limit of the division he was going to be competing in. He didn't sustain a succession of debilitating wars like Chacon, Ali and Saad Muhammad, yet his competitive duration was a fraction of theirs. (Saad's prime longevity was comparable, but starting with Parlov in 1975, Matt had over a dozen fights against future or present world champions, and a handful more against contenders who challenged champions other than himself. His six greatest wins were far more taxing.)

Sure, he was a great fighter and talent, but his grand career total record in strict title defenses is 4-1 as a defending champion, if we toss out the two matches with Hearns as unifications instead of defenses. (W KO4 Green, L UD15 Duran, W TKO 10Bonds, W TKO 3Finch, and W UD12 Duran.) Not only does he fail to reach double figures as a defending champion, he doesn't even reach the total of five required for a pilot to become an ace. Ray actually won more title challenges than he did defenses. (Again, I'm throwing out the two unifications with Hearns, in favor of the strict challenges against Benitez, Duran in New Orleans, Kalule, Hagler and LaLonde. That's five successful challenges against four defenses. By comparison, Hearns had three at 147, and five at 154. While reigning at JMW, Tommy also diversified a bit, lifting the NABF MW Title from Shuler, and defending it against DeWitt, as well as challenging Hagler before knocking out Roldan.)

Ray has a pithy record. Hearns I and Hagler are for the ages, but the lack of volume and longevity give me some pause. Duran may have actually been slightly over the hill in Montreal (Barney Ross was retired by that age), yet he continued on for over two more decades. The argument can be made that SRL had maybe a dozen prime fights in as few as five different calendar years of competition.

It's been questioned whether or not Pryor is an ATG. The Hawk did reach double figures in title defenses, and did it over a span of six consecutive calendar years, remaining undefeated throughout his reign. Ray was dethroned in his second WBC WW defense. Duran II was in November 1980, and Finch came four fights later in February 1982. Ali was more prolific in 1966 alone. Both Pryor and Ray finished with a grand total of 40 fights on their records, but Aaron only lost to the murderous punching Bobby Joe Young after an absence of over two cocaine abusing years, yet somehow actually did go out a winner with a three bout knockout streak against albeit nondescript competition. (I'd have never thought he'd go out a winner, and Arguello a loser.)

In his own mind, I suspect Ray has some lingering doubts. He's very candid about the fact of having had a total of 40 fights compared to the hundreds of others by heros of yore, and he's never disputed that Hearns was the rightful winner of their rematch. (I respect him immensely for this rare admission.)

 

Ha ha ha , great comeback:good

 

Yes

 

Nope

 

No, they aren't. Norris never hit hard enough to score quick KOs over sturdy-chinned HOFers like Duran and Cuevas, or naturally bigger men like Shuler.

Wrong again. Norris needed two fights just to adapt to an old, naturally smaller fighter in Brown. Tommy was versatile enough to clearly outbox a reigning champ when well past his prime and several weight classes above his best weight.

OK, ask him.

Why?

As opposed to Norris being bombed out early in two jr. middleweight fights (in other words, at his natural weight class).

Um, OK, he never lost to Brown then. :nut

He already did catch up (and surpass) by setting the record for titles won across weight class.

Since when is there a record for "beating superstars"? :huh

The Brown loss clearly shows otherwise.

Show me where Norris was ever quicker than this?

[yt]N-Ipn_Y3iNM[/yt]

Already shown to be untrue.

His biggest challenge was Jackson, and that was about as far from "shining" as you could get.

Nice to know you rightfully acknowledge Leonard as a bigger challenge then Cuevas, then. :yep:deal

Not any 7 that were listed here.

SPEED was already one of the categories, you ass! atsch

 

Look how much bigger hearns was compared to duran, it was like a man vs a boy. Overrated win, benitez and cuevas were also much smaller than him. The only thomas hearns win that really impresses me is Virgil Hill.

 

I'd love to hear redrooster's explanation for why he thinks Norris would lose to an easy Hearns victim like Cuevas, if Norris is so much better than Hearns.

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1781952&postcount=4

:huh:think