Hearns, Hagler, Leonard or Duran?

:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

 

Man are you distorted in thinking....you Leonard beat a shell of a Hagler? You say Hagler lost his speed? Hagler never had any speed!! Leonard & Hagler were both a bit past it. But to use Norrois as measuring stick, hell Norris had no chin, and prime on prime, SRL would have handed Norris his ass. Tommy Hearns would have stoned Norris dead. Quit hanging on the Norris nuts....:blood

 

Are you actually saying that Leonard was prime for Terry and Camacho? Anyone would have beaten Ray when Hector did, that was almost 10 years after his last win. And with Terry, Ray was weak and flat and inactive. Hearns was much better than Terry Norris. Hearns was very versatile. He outboxed Virgil Hill and Wilfred Benitez.

 

Redrooster, happens to come to the conclusion that Leonard was still in his prime against Norris simply because he used his legs and moved around the ring. This man has "double standards" as a tattoo on his forehead. Hagler was a shell? It makes everyone laugh. He must be embarrassed with his comments continually being shot down by posters on a near daily basis.

I have mentioned, more than once, about Camacho moving around the ring like a roadrunner against De La Hoya. However, Rooster has decided to ignore this whenever I've mentioned it.

If Leonard showed that running around the ring supports any claims that he was still in his prime, Camacho must have been as well. :good

 

Speed is relative. Without it, an A-class fighter such as Hagler cannot put enough snap necessary to hurt the opponent, whoever it may be; even one such as Leonard. At the time of the fight, Hagler slowed to the point Ali had in his meeting with Young. When I first put on a set of gloves, the trainer told me to snap my punches, often reminding me not to push them out. This is often the problem with fighters on their last legs such as Ali in 1976 or Hagler in 1986/87.

Indeed, you are right-Hagler had become a plodder at the time of his fight with Leonard/retirement.

With Leonard, the situation was quite different. here was a fighter that even tho age 34, had most of his skills were intact and on a usable level comparable with Bernard Hopkins, Archie Moore, Dick Tiger, Joe Walcott...which you will see ray admit to in part 1 of this video.

Click here for proof-->

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHKIqDdBCP0

There is no denying or trying to hide it as embarrassing as the loss may be. Ray had his legs and from what I can see, used the combinations quite well early in the fight. His problem? Norris was not a stationary target but moved out quickly, scoring before Ray leonard could get set, that there was nothing to hit but air. With his great speed, he could get away with it.

No shame in losing to Terry. Still a great fighter in my book.

A side note: And from what I often see, Tommy also had a glass jaw. Remember, that's not me talking, it's the consensus.

 

I've seen Leonard's prime. He was incredible. In fact I was watching the fight last night. My friends and I talked about that right hand for hours. But we also remarked how Tommy's hit and move strategy completely threw Ray off. Ray simply could not adjust the way hagler did. With that in mind, I knew that if he EVER faced off with a Micheal Nunn type, it would be over for him.

How many fighters has Ray faced that had the speed of Norris?

Ray doesnt have the experience necessary to cope with the style of Terry, who is always on the move, scoring on the way in and then moving back out of range. Norris & Camacho are these types of fighters and when they put it together in an aggressive mode, spell big trouble for Ray.

Moreover, if you study the genius of Ray Leonard, you will note that he does take some time while looking for the right openings to score. This was the kiss of death with Norris who would capatilize on his frequent pause and stare style.

In short, it's Terry's style that was responsible for his defeat and his inability to properly perpare for his style. Not sure if there's any amount of preparation he could take for a fighter like Terry and he lacked the firepower to take out terry with one blow.

Still a great warrior and one of the 80s best. :good

 

Did boxing history ever see a better window in time?

These 4 had everything! The perfect blend - that's why we're still talking about them.

Happy to say I rated the least favourite of some, Leonard, as personal favourite.

But Hearns was great to watch, and Hagler & Duran were just plain great!

Bye & bye, the book 'Four Kings' about these particular guys is an absolute gem!!

 

Norris' win over Leonard was a quality win. Leonard still had a lot left. How old was he? Mid-30s? It wasn't like he had fought a lot of fights and suffered significant wear and tear like Hagler. Norris was just a lot better than Leonard. People don't give Norris enough credit.

I would pick Norris to beat Leonard whenever they fought. This doesn't mean that Norris would win, just that I wouldn't bet against him. Remember how Leonard struggled with Ayub Kalule? Leonard was getting tagged, and looked amateurish at times. Remember Leonard dusting himself off after Kevin Howard put him down (although only a bit over welterweight for that one)? Leonard was stunned by Marcos Geraldo in an earlier test at middleweight. Norris was lightyears better than those guys.

The problem in the Norris fight, aside from Norris' excellent boxing skills and speed, wasn't so much Leonard's age as it was that the bigger men were just, well, too big for him. This tells us how far Hagler had slipped in his skills by the time he met Leonard. A year or two earlier, and Leonard wouldn't have stood much of a chance of seeing the final bell.

For the person describing Hagler as "plodding," it's clear this person hasn't watched many Hagler fights. You lose credibility when you make silly comments like that.

 

You guys are amazing!! :happyYou all want to say how great Norris was because he beat an old tired Leonard, who then got his ass handed to him by Camacho, ........but then because Leonard made Hagler look like the bumbling amatuer southpaw foot in the bucket plodder he was, (and always was) you want say how Hagler was past his best......Hagler was most over rated MW in history, he never had a best.

And Leonard beats Terry Norris prime on prime all day everyday, and twice on sundays. And Sugar Ray would have beaten Hagler any day, any time because Hagler could not box a lick.......:good

 

It was Hearns jab and picking Ray apart up and down with the jab which hurt Ray so much. Tommy was fast and Ray could not get close until Tommy decided to try to knock Ray out. Tommy could have beaten up Ray everytime if Tommy would have just boxed him and not tried to land anything significant. Terry Norris got hit with a jab of Brown and rocked and stopped. Ray in his prime had a good jab which would have hurt Terry. Terry only had a 71 inch reach. Ray knocks out Terry Norris in his prime. What beat Ray with Norris was speed and age. Ray at 34 was way past his prime because he was too inactive when he should have fought in his prime. You are trying to make Terry Norris into this ATG. He does not have the chin. Ray and Tommy and Marvin and Roberto were all time greats. Terry was not.

 

If you were talking about Hagler's jab I would agree with you. Hagler busted people up with the jab and put opponents on ***** street; Leonard did not.

Therefore, Leonard cannot hurt Norris. But we know Terry can hurt Leonard.

Face it, Terry is just too fast with him. If Ray thought he had his hands full with Tommy's jab, he'd run into far worse with Terry because Terry had a lot more going for him than just a jab. he KNEW how to set even leonard up for his best shots.

i dont really believe that talk about Ray's layoff hurting him in the Norris fight becuz of the fact he beat hagler with one fight in 5 yrs. People also talk about Terry as having a glass jaw but notice that after all was said and done, that it was Terry who put a hurting on leonard?

Facts speak for themselves. he even hurt Ray to the body in the opening round. Again in round two he sent Ray to the canvas with a counterpunch to fast to defend against. Ray had no chance but to go down; his legs gave way.

Again in the third round, Terry set up the perfect combination-a jab, a right to the body and a left uppercut. After that, I lost count. But Ray was thru for the night in round 3.

That's how good Norris was. Even 3-1 fav, 5 time champion Leonard was helpless before him. Ray had never faced an opponent with the diversity, the speed, the power, the defense, the competitiveness all combined into one opponent.

Leonard is still great no doubt but head to head he knows Terry Norris is too much challenge.

 

Leonard would beat Terry easily in his prime. You actually think the Feb. 1991 version of Ray is the real Ray? Ray was too good for Terry. he would knock him out easily enough. Ray always found guys chins and Terry's he would find and stop him. I think Ray's jab would be the key with Terry. Norris was ok but he was not great. The guy lost to Simon Brown which started with a jab. Good fighter and decent reign, but not great. He didn't even have lateral movement. He wasted his time hoping up and down and not side to side. Quick hands, but Leonard would have stopped him in about 3 or 4. Terry is not an ATG..

 

Now you know I'd love to take your word for the claims you just made but all the facts are on my side. It was much too one sided for me to conclude Ray was even remotely Terry's equal and as we all know, fights are decided in the ring, not on paper. :nono

It is not enough to merely say that so and so had a crappy chin. YOu obviously overlook his assets as a fighter and that is where people have gone wrong.

Besides, Terry wasnt the only one with chin problems. Ray Leonard has been dropped by Kevin Howard at the age of 27. Do you think Howard would have dropped Terry Norris? Unlikely to happen. What do you think Terry would have done to him? It's likely that Ray would have met with the same fate against Terry, only sooner.

I know it seems illogical to even compare the two considering their reputations but I've seen stranger things happen in boxing. Look what happened in the Cuevas hearns fight. The Ali-Foreman fight. Foreman Frazier fight. The Ali-Liston fight. All contests in which the challenger raised the level of his game and overwhelmed the favorite.

miracles happen dont they? And Norris was definitely the miracle man the night he upset the odds. He beat the reigning five time world champion, unbeaten in 11 years. That's a fact!

Terry didnt have the problems with speedy fighters that Leoanrd had. This can be seen in the Taylor fight. Just as in the leonard fight, it took about a round and a half for Terry to start working his concussive magic.

So cheer up! Ray Leonard is in good company. John Mugabi, Simon Brown, Maurice Blocker, Don Curry, Meldrick Taylor, Carl Daniels that fell to Terry's blazing fists.

I would love adding Julian Jackson to that list but facts deter me from doing so. To make claims without any proof would be dishonest. You'll never see me boasting how Terry is above Jackson. :nono

 

So Jackson must be above Leonard with your flawed logic......

 

I'll make this short and sweet: Jackson knew the secret for dealing with blazing fast boxers and succeeded; Leonard didnt.

Both were great but Jackson adjusted to adversity more easily