Donald Curry vs Julian Jackson

Curry, the 80s pound 4 pound king? Hmmm, from the period beating McCrory to losing to Honeghan maybe. That's about a year; hardly makes him the king of the 80s. Anyway, at Jr Middle? I think, for all his talent, Curry would get caught after dominating the fight for 4 or 5 rounds, similar to his fight with McCallum.

 

i dont think he met as in terms of the entire 80s ...but at one time p4p king during the 80s

 

..........The Curry that fought at 154 was nothing like the 147 version.

And it wasn't all about Honeyghan beating him, either. Take a look at the fights against Green and Baez. The physical strength wasn't as pronounced, neither was the power. He then later fought Tony Montgomery and Carlos Santos after being hammered by Lloyd, and the same symptoms showed up. He couldn't move those guys, and he had to allow some ingress to these bigger fighters, which meant he got hit more.


Against Julian Jackson, you don't want to get hit more.

 

I look back at films of Curry and think what a waste. Supertalented boxer but terribly managed. Hanging around at Welter after he'd done everything to fight relative no names for small purses made no sense at all.

 

..............I don't think he was badly managed at all. There were some good fights for him at welter when he was there, and the unification fight between he and McCrory was being talked about well in advance of it actually happening. He had to stick around at least that long.

One could argue that he stayed at welter too long, but boxing history is filled with these stories. His managers weren't responsible for him going out and partying and losing focus. That was what did him in, at least as far as making 147 goes.

 

Oh I agree that he was right to stick around for McCrory. In the post fight interview he said that that was his last fight at welter as there was "no one the division to motivate me". His management should have then got him on track to properly building him up to jr middle and getting him some fights there. Instead they chose to take on two no name opponents when he was struggling for motivation and to make the weight. That's bad management in my book.

 

1985 Curry would have easily beaten Jackson i think....Curry had great boxing skills , Jackson only average.....but you never know with punching power Jackson had ofcourse ...my odds Curry 6-1 favorite [ in 1985 ]

 

No: Pound for pound ratings were rarely done in the decade, until Tyson started dominating the Heavies.

Looking at the KO year end pound for pound ratings/poll, Curry was #20 in 84; #4 in 85; #3 in 86.

But to answer the question on the thread I think the Curry who fought McCallum would have enough to beat the 154lbs Jackson, probably by mid round KO. But Jackson would be a live underdog as McCallum showed Curry could be sucked...

 

Not to discredit McCallum, but he was losing to Curry and caught him with one punch. I regard McCallum higher than Jackson and think Curry would've been able to navigate through the danger. Curry W12.

 

Cotto is actually right - at one time Curry was indeed on top of the list above Hagler.

 

thats what i figured

 

There is no definitive ratings on the issue, it is personal opinion. I know all ratings are personal, but pound for pound even more so with its warped concept.

The one pound for pound ratings (of the time) with the most general credibility was KO's end of year poll; Curry never rated above Hagler; his highest rating being in 86:

10 Camacho
9 Chavez
8 Holyfield
=6 Spinks
=6 Nelson
5 Rosario
4 Hearns
3 Curry
2 Tyson
1 Hagler

 

he was on top of the rings pound for pound i'm pretty sure

 

The Ring did not do it. Like I said few bothered until Tyson was so dominate that something was needed to create interest.

Indeed from certainly the mid 80s until it went bust (89/90) The Ring only rated fighters in the Classic eight. Thus a Carlos Deleon would be rated at Light Heavy; a 130 Chavez at Lightweight etc.