Hearns v Curry?

Not at 160, Curry was one hell of a welterweight but was only a decent 154lber, theres nothing there to suggest he could beat Hearns at 160 IMHO.

But yes, I did think Curry was the real deal inbetween 147 and 160 at the time...

 

Curry with hindsight (I was picking a pre Honeyghan Curry to beat Hagler ); was not the fighter we thought he might be in 85/86. There is IMO no way he beats Hearns...

 

On Curry's best night, and on Hearns' absolute worst, no way does Curry beat Hearns (I am of course talking as a welter or middle, not the fuddy duddy Hearns of today).

In fact, I'll go a step further, no way does Curry survive to hear the final bell against Hearns.

 

Technically he was there to a point, but as we found out in due course he lacked the intangables, like heart and redemption, that the seperates the mere excellent from the greats.

But yes hands up, I fell for the Curry hype, hook, line and sinker.

 

I agree with SS, but Curry for a time was one heckuva fighter. Obviously didn't quite turn out as we began to expect, but certainly run hot for a period. Personally i think Hearns is a terrible match for him with all that reach, power and speed. Curry would be out of his comfort zone here, which is where no-one took him in his excellent run. Deep down Curry's durability worries me a bit, even at his best. Tropuble was he was too good for it to be tested, for quite some time. It sure gets tested here.

 

I wasn't following the sport in real time when Curry what at his peak, but looking back on some of his fights, it's hard to comprehend what exactly fascinated everyone about Curry.

Good solid technique and skills for sure, but nothing really outstanding.

I mean, against the only excellent (but by no means great) fighter he beat in his prime, Marlon Starling, he struggled mightily not once but twice (I thought Marlon was within a couple points of winning both times). Did people think THAT much of Marlon that a victory over him got everyone excited?

 

I know he impressed or rather left a lasting impression on Colin Jones, indeed Jones is still looking for his nose to this very day.

 

AS much as anything, it was the way he beat people, especially McCrory. McCRory was quite a decent fighter, and Curry absolutely raped him.

 

Raped him indeed, but just how decent was McCrory? Or Colin Jones for that matter?

 

McCrory was quite well regarded for a long time, Jones was a good honest fighter. Stafford had never been stopped and Curry took him out in one. Starling was a very good win. Larocca had a bit of talent too, very fast. Curry could fight. Tho done badly in the end his superb ability was there for all to see vs McCallum. Stunned him once or twice too.

 

Hearns win in KO in 2-3 rds at most.

 

Curry was the choice as P4P because of that run he went on starting in '84. First, he beat Starling again, then crushed Diaz on national TV. He then KO'd unbeaten Larocca, then thrashed Jones in convincing fashion. That was big becasue of how Jones had done against Mccrory. Then to top it off he beat the only other guy in the division Mccrory of course, in even more convincing fashion. He had a real head of steam going, and those were pretty good fighters he beat back to back to back.

 

Jones was awesomely destructive-if hampered badly by his inability to cut off the ring-a less talented harder hitting Tito.He was unlucky as far as the styles of fighters he challenged world titles for.Honeyghan and Brown might not have had the success they did had the welshman not retired so early.

a guy like Quartey or Cuevas would have been caved in brutally by Jones.

I agree to an extent that Curry was being vastly overrated, especially by the American boxing media.He never had the mentality or durability to be great.

His skills were impeccable in many ways though.One of the best punch-pickers and offensive fighters of all-time in any weightclass.No wasted motion and telegraphed nothing-just a terrific technical boxer-puncher.

Criticise his fights with Starling if you want, but to me those are among the very best technical fights you will see at 147.

The second being a masterclass of clean infighting that puts clutchfests like Griffith vs Paret to shame.

There hasn't been a Welterweight fight that compares to the second bout since it.