Mike McCallum vs. Tony Ayala

LAXPDX, I bet you anything some ignoramus here is going to counter with "Wilfred would outbox Tony Ayala for a late round tko and regain the title".

 

man, you dont know **** about boxing. terry beat leonard when leonard was shot.

prime leonard would have killed him.

 

If Ray Leonard shot why they make him a 3-1 favorite? leonard shot because Terry Norris make him look shot. :smoke

 

You surely would know by now the forum ain't stupid mate. Terry was the World champion!

What was Tony?

Terry had poleaxed your beloved Mugabi in a defense!! What name had Tony beat?

 

Then why wasn't Norris given a second thought when all the newspaper columnists were making their pick? Nobody slings it like you.

And Mugabi's never been one of my favorites. You got me mixed up with someone else and you totally f****ed yourself that time. You sure you seen this fight because Terry won the title from Mugabi.

 

Why wasn't Douglas given a thought? Mike Spinks vs Holmes? Holyfield's odds vs Tyson? Haugen vs Camacho?

The simple fact is the media did not know just how past it Leonard was. **** happens. Emmanuel Steward said it even before Leonard fought Hearns - the Leonard who beat LaLonde is not the same fighter who beat Hagler. He actually said he thought the media were making a big mistake focusing only on the line of how much Hearns was shot. He said here was a very ordinary fighter in LaLonde giving Leonard absolute hell. A past it Hearns then gave Leonard more than he could handle, and the general consensus were also fooled when he boxed rings around a Duran who had regained glory over a totally different fighter with the one style he could still potentially rise up to beat. You could have put a number of quality slick boxers in there instead of Leonard and they would have beaten Duran. Add to this Norris did not yet have much fanfare and we had the makings of a big surprise. A Michael Nunn would have dished out a similar flogging. At Ray's stage Norris' great snap, sharpness and handspeed proved too much. Youth prevailed, it had to at some point and Ray bit off one more than he could chew. You of all people should be able to follow, being a Camacho hugger and all.

You proclaim Camacho was over the hill by the time of the Haugen loss

Bearing the above sentence in mind fancy a lil Aussie song dedication?

[yt]kxzxq2T9knU[/yt]

This content is protected

 

The bookies are often wrong. They favoured Tito to beat Hopkins, for example. What a joke that was. Anyone with some knowledge of the sport should realise that a good 147lber cannot beat a better 160lber.

Let's not get into the idea that the bookies are always right. Otherwise, there would be no point in having bookies, would there?

 

I'm not interested in your lame music so I'm not going to bother with your video. You're wasting your time!

And your choice of fights is just as lame. You're talking about Tyson a 42-1 favorite, 24 years old. Is that old or what?

using lalonde is another mistake. saying leonard wasnt the same fighter in the Hagler fight. Leonard been having trouble with the likes of Kevin Howard who is shorter than Leonard! So what's his excuse now???

You cant use age since he was only 27 so like with your Tyson example you are **** out of luck again. Leonard have problems with Donny because he connected on the back of his head and since Ray could never take a hard whack anyways, he fall down.

leonard thinks lalonde was a challenge but isnt really a repsected opponent while Ayala is much more reputable opponent even as a prospect. And even as a prospect, it's impossible not to acknowledge him as a sure bet to win at least one title the way Camacho won his.