Hearns v Curry?

I have to say beating Rosi was nothing special. The man had 18 ko's in 62 fights so he was never going to give Curry's chin any sort of test. A beautifully selected match for Curry at that stage. Rosi had beat nobody of great note and was actually taken out in 3 by Honeyghan the year before he beat Curry.

 

You are mixing up what happened post the argument for his postioning as #1 pound for pound in the world. That was occuring in 85/86. His drug habit was not known (at least by the masses). McCallum/Aquino/Rosi and his journey at 154lbs had not happened.

We had with hindsight a devastating undefeated Welterweight Champion of the World who had beaten indeed destroyed pretty much everything in the divison, but he had done it in a weak era (for the 147lbers). If you rated him #1 in 86 (and I did) it was because of potential not actual results. Curry for whatever reason did not become that fighter I hoped he would be, it was with hindsight a false dawn.

 

How the hell did Jun Sok Hwang floor Curry? Unbelievable.

 

Hwang was powerful, but slow. He was also telegraphing his shots. But in the midst of that 15 rounder, he backed to the ropes and caught Curry coming in with a very short right hand that showed no signs of coming. It was a clean one punch knockdown, but more of the flash variety. However, that blow did raise questions in my mind about Don's chin in the way he went down.

That knockdown was Hwang's only high point in the match. Without it, Curry might have been able to shut the South Korean out on points. But at no point did Donald have Hwang in any kind of trouble. He looked to be a really strong and durable customer. (Far more so than Don later showed against Honeyghan, McCallum, Nunn and Norris.)

 

Curry would have had a good chance in this fight, but the most likely scenario is that Hearns blasts him out in a few rounds. Curry almost always had a edge in handspeed over guys he fought in his prime, but Tommy was faster. Tommy was also a better boxer from the outside. Curry's only chance would be to get inside, but he'd have to go through that Hearns' right hand to do so, and I dont think he'd handle it too well. Hearns KO 4.

 

Wow you're overrating the hell outta Colin Jones! He could punch no doubt, he doesnt deserve to be mentioned the same sentence as Tito, and no, he didnt hit as hard as Tito either. Tito would have brutally KO'd McCrory, something Jones couldnt do.

Jones might have beaten someone like Mayorga, thats about it.

Honeyghan would be too quick for him. Simon Brown would've beaten the **** outta him. Quartey would have jabbed him to death, and Cuevas would have knocked his head clean off!

 

Bad matchup for Curry, as Hearns was for most fighters throughout history. Curry really seemed to be the real deal in his prime though, fundamentally sound as they came, one of the best examples of a textbook boxer-puncher in modern times. Outside influences and lack of durability hurt him in the long run though, and kept him from ever being a truly great fighter.

 

Curry was WAY faster than ****in Buddy McGirt my friend!

 

I don't think so, McGirt was quite fast, Curry was just more fundamentally sound.

[YT]yaaJ2obyzww[/YT]

compared with:

[YT]lyzw0548wEQ[/YT]

 

I have to disagree. Curry had faster hands. Curry's handspeed wasnt on par with Leonard's, or Hearns', but he was still EXTREMELY quick handed, esp with single shots.

McGirt's handspeed was good, but nothing more. McGirt just benefitted by being technically sound. Curry was a MUCH better natural athlete, with way more talent than McGirt ever had.

And furthermore, Curry would have knocked McGirt into the middle of next week.

 

I had it 2 rounds a piece with Curry winning the 5th round before getting starched. He was not "taking him apart", though he was coming on more prior to the McCallum left hook to the jaw.

By the way, some great reading early on in this thread.

 

McGirt was technically sound, but in the fight I just posted he showed a very unorthodox style, using more movement with more overall footspeed than a guy like Curry had. Hand-speed edge goes to Curry, more or less because he placed his punches so well.

I don't think we need to jump to conclusions about the outcome of this fight either, Curry was beaten, and beaten badly on occasion. He wasn't indestructible, though I'd assume he'd have beaten McGirt.

 

Don't know where you're getting the thought that McGirt was more technically sound than Curry from. Curry was Mr. Textbook with his punches. McGirt can only be characterised as awkward, no way known was he more technically sound.

If anyone benefits from being technically sound it's Curry, not McGirt. Curry's speed is being overrated big time here because of how well he set up, timed and placed his shots. But setting up, timing and placing shots do not = speed.

The clip of McGirt shown by Sweet Pea doesn't really do McGirt's speed justice. He throws about ten punches in that clip against another awkward moving target. Curry is shown landing punches against a guy that invites punishment and stands right in front of him.

Why don't we even up the tables? I'll put up a clip of McGirt picking apart a come forward brawler Frankie Warren and then we'll talk handspeed. Will do it in about a day or two. I'm ****-snowed under with work at the minute.

 

And Curry also raped a fighter who as good as fought on even terms with McCrory over two fights, Colin Jones.

 

I don't believe Curry was overrated. He was an exceptional fighter who just fizzled out very quickly, whether that was due to drugs or weight or having so many fights as an amateur. What's the point in having over 400 amateur fights? But I don't think Curry beats Tommy at any weight. I don't think it's a quick blowout, Curry's defense was too good in my opinion. But rather an accumulation of jabs, straight rights to the body, and Tommy liked to hook to the liver when a guy covered up. It took a guy with great skills, durability, and courage to beat Tommy (Hagler, Leonard). Curry had grreat skills but proved lacking in other areas.