jokes aside about his being a complete *******: how do you figure he fares against hearns, norris or wright?
I think Hearns has a chance if he can land that big right and put Tony out relatively early. Otherwise, Hearns' questionable chin and stamina comes into play and Tony's mauling style will likely exploit that. Norris has speed, but not the power to keep Tony off him for too long. Tony's power and ferocity would ultimately be Winky's undoing as well.
I always saw Ayala as significantly below the legends Duran,Hearns,Hagler and Leonard. The level I see him at is the Matthew Hilton level or a little above. Great puncher but we really do not know if he would have become great. I would have to say if I had to be honest he would have been very good, his defense was not great which is sometimes the case with big punchers, they sacrifice defense for offence. With the legends of the 1980's if your defense was not great you were not going to win very easily. I think he would have made it interesting and turned out to be a very good fighter. I am not sure his defense would have been good for longevity. His power I think was world class. I think Hearns lands the right easily as he always did, Duran outpunches Tony on the insideand uses inside experience to stop Tony in 9 or 10 or sooner, Benitez and Leonard outbox him. Hagler beats him similar to how he beat Sibson. But then you get the level below the fab 4 and Tony does ok. Davey Moore would have been winnable for Tony. Kalule would have been an interesting fight for Tony. Very tough. McCallum? Tony would not beat Mike. Mike was too technical. Mugabi vs. Tony? Hard to say. I would lean toward Tony after thinking more about this fight. I might have said Mugabi before, but John had a habit of folding with big punchers and Tony could punch. So to the question you ask. If I had to say how good Tony could have been? Better than Matthew Hilton but not as good as Terry Norris.
Ayala was a load. He was a total bull, but that's so were guys like J.C. Vasquez. They are good enough to win alphabet belts and make for tough fights, but they remain beatable. Ayala's team steered clear of boxers when he was coming up, and getting tagged by Maldonado may have exposed a vulnerable chin. I really would have like to see him fight a Moore, Mugabi, or even a Hard Rock Green or Frank Fletcher to see how good he was. With this being said, I believe he may have been 50/50 against Moore, but not good enough to beat Mugabi.
Frank the Animal and Hard Rock would have been good fights to see how good Ayala was and where he could go. Can you imagine a fight between Ayala at 160 fighting Juan Roldan?
at the least, as much as i personally hate the ****er, the recent threads have made me re-evaluate him and i think i'll take a look at his fights
You really think he is a legend? The legends were Roberto Duran, Thomas Hearns, Sugar Ray Leonard, Marvin Hagler, Wilfred Benitez - they were the legends. They fought each other!!!! Ayala fought none of them!! Come on. I understand fan appreciation but legends fight each other and the best. Ayala didn't fight the best and certainly never beat the best.
well that guy said Ayala was a legend. Look on Hearns or Durans or Leonards resume and you see the names of Hearns and Leonard and Duran on each other's record. Look on Ayala's and you see Maldonado and other tomato cans. If he never fought the greats then he is out of consideration. He will never be a legend or a great fighter. It is almost an insult on the fab 4 to even mention Ayala in the same sentence as them. They were elite. Everyone wanted to fight them.