Prime Michael Dokes vs the Holyfield that he fought

Poor John's out of his mind with grief over this.

 

I watched this fight recently and Norris blatantly hit Leonard when he was down in the second,and should have been DQ'd immediately.It looked to me as though Ray fought in a daze from that point on,so I give Norris no credit for this victory over a reduced opponent.

Norris has form when it comes to dirty fighting,which is a pity as he was a very good fighter who didn't have to resort to this ****.That said I've no doubt Ray would have KO'd him had he not been subjected to these disgraceful tactics (and believe me this was a calculated attack by Norris).:-(

 

I think when Rooster calls Terry Norris a great fighter, he must be confusing him with Chuck Norris.

 

A new excuse now? He's not much of a legend if he has to rely on a dq to get him through a fight he can't otherwise win. Yes, the extra hit while down was uncalled for but wasn't necessary. Track what happened from that point on instead of fabricating it. The kd happend just before the bell. How would you know the gay one fought in a daze from that point on if the bell rang to end the round?

No sooner had the third rang when Norris backed him to the ropes and launched his head into orbit. From that point on, Gay Leopard was a ruined fighter physically. He was a damaged fighter mentally and physically, he felt his guts turn to jelly. Knowing it was the start of the third round didn't help him either. :yep

A side note: Leopard's back was to the camera the first few seconds to start the third so....how could you tell Leopard fought in a daze from the point of the first kd if 1) the bell ended immediately after and 2) He had his back to the ropes starting the third round and 3) Was nailed hard immediately after the bell for the 3rd began the round? Kind of hard to distinguish which blow that put him in a daze.

I think it makes more sense to say the quick succession of the first kd and the uppercut was what did it. Up till then, Leopard wasn't doing very well.

Your latest attempt for an excuse has failed, exposed for what it was by Rooster-Supreme.

 

And if I were you Griff, I wouldn't start up nothing. You want to end up like Woody here? Believe me, he's hurting!

 

What's going on here? Is Rooster up to his old tricks again. What's his claim this time, that Ali was in his prime against Berbick or some crazy **** like that?

 

It was obvious at some point that the latter 89 version of Dokes wasn't the same fighter. Heavier, and to me, didn't have the same handspeed, but maybe a bit tougher in the trenches.

 

Well it's near on par with that

 

While watching some of Doke's later fights during the late 80's/early 90's, I listened to commentators point out that Dokes was more of a puncher in his reincarnation, as opposed to being the boxer that he once was in the early 80's. He had put on some muscle mass and was setting down more on his punches. Plus, he was a bit more aggressive. I think this type of fighter posed a greater threat to a young cruiserweight moving up then the first rendition of Dokes did.

Just my opinion.

 

I have no respect for you but you do make me laugh.

As for Norris-Leonard I'm just following your example of making up bull**** stories based on flimsy evidence and repeating it over and over and over again.

It seems to work for you as you take people getting bored with you and moving on as a sign of surrender no matter how stupid they made your arguments look.

So I say again Leonard fought in a daze from a Norris cheap shot and that's the only reason he lost.:smoke

 

are you trying to bait me?

 

Just giving you a bit of your own medicine back by completely discrediting one of your favourite fighters best performances with a bull**** excuse.

Like you do with Leonard against Hearns,Duran,Hagler etc etc...

Annoying isn't it?:hey





Oh and by the way Leonard was also weight drained when Norris beat him.:good

 

The difference is I never bull**** about things like that and that's what annoys you.