Ray Leonard's book

First of all, Hagler was shot and no two fighters age at the same rate especially is one fighter is butting heads with top ranked fighters/punchers on a regular basis

second, I was right on when I said Ray had never faced anyone with the speed & overall defensive skillz of Terry Norris.

Terry could box, bang N move with the best of 'em. Just ask Meldrick Taylor, the fastest fighter of all time.

You didnt see TN move around with his hands at his side like Hearns. Terry was the complete package on defense.

Thomas didnt even know how to hold on when hurt whereas WHENEVER Ray moved in too close, we saw Terry skillfully grab and stifle his momentum to the point he could never get a sustained offense going.

Then by the time the ref broke them up, Terry was long gone and Ray had to start over.

You're right tho, being the aggressor was never Ray's style. That is why he would never do well against the Terry Norris types, the Micheal Nunn types, the Roy Jones types and why he faced so few of them.

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_Id6-oOY1U&feature=player_detailpage[/ame]


"Terry your defense is so complete, why did you drop your left hand to your side with your back to the ropes against the best puncher of all time...Terry..Terry...speak to me...TERRY"

 

RR = the real life Terry Norris for sure

 

Wasn`t that a thing of beauty !!!

 

I understand the frustration of having Leonard fall to the young speedster. Ray had just never faced anyone with this level of speed before combined with the all around prowess of Norris.

Terry certainly learned from the Jackson fight and it's doubtful the outcome of a rematch wouldve been the same. Remember, Terry was young and it was his first televised fight.

He had certainly come a long way when he stepped into the limelight against Sugar Ray Leonard, displaying nerves of steel, and ice in his veins.

Terry DID NOT freeze up nor did he make any worthwhile mistakes that Leonard could capitalize on. He made LEONARD make the mistakes. Terry fought a near perfect fight in a major upset.

I understand the appeal in which Leonard had with his fans. I too grew up in the Leonard era

But I'm not one of those people who think that no other fighter from another era outside of Leonard's could not compete with him. I have an open mind knowing that you can't win 'em all and that applies even to Leonard.

Had we seen more of him, perhaps against Aaron Pryor in a 1983 superbout and Doanld Curry in a 1985 superbout, I would put more stock in him. Otherwise, Norris wins 10/10.

That means everytime they fought, Norris would beat him.

 

I am not Terry Norris and you all know it. I praise Norris simply becuz he is so deserving of it.

How can one not admire the courage Norris showed when he came back from that smashing defeat to Jackson? and then to go on to become the greatest fighter in his division :happy

When Terry was young he was so good no one could so much as test him.

I just happen to appreciate fighters that overcome the odds, such as Jack Johnson, the first black heavyweight champion who I believe should be in the history books. His story "unforgivable blackness" is a must read.

Jack Johnson, Sam Langford (Boston tar baby), and Terry Norris are three outstanding examples of what a champion is about

 

*Explains that seeing his parents get into fights with each other, and having 2 people tryna suck his BBC on separate occasions is what fueled his fury to be used in boxing matches

*Talks about how he didn't like it as a child when his father ****ed white women

*There were even talks to put him in with OSCARatsch
*Has plenty dedicated to how he fooled around when his first wife wasn't looking. He was with his wife as a teen, but still did his white coach's two teenage daughters:thumbsup

*Really likes Hearns

*Shares that Robearto immediately told Leonard after Robearto-Hagler that Hagler can be beat by outboxing him

 

...just did.

Look at the evidence. It's about as conclusive as it gets.

That seems about right.

 

Excuses are excuses.

Duran's story was downright silly and everyone knew it. But then, Duran isn't what anyone would call cunning outside the ring. Leonard was different. His brilliance wasn't confined to the ring.

Unfortunately, his political savvy and his charm seems to be enough to fool boxing guys who should remember what he and Angelo said before he lost to Duran.

 

Excuses are excuses.

Duran's story was downright silly and everyone knew it. But then, Duran isn't what anyone would call cunning outside the ring. Leonard was different. His brilliance wasn't confined to the ring.

Unfortunately, his political savvy and his charm seems to be enough to fool boxing guys who should remember what he and Angelo said before he lost to Duran.

 

No offense taken!

I have read the book.

Bias...? Since when is assuming a position based on evidence indicative of bias? I am a fan of Duran but I'm not blind to his flaws -particulary his disgrace in New Orleans. Duran has disrespected boxing more than anyone this side of Tyson. I'm also a fan of Leonard -but his arrogance and games cast a shadow on what is undeniably a great career. Anyone who denies or excuses either man's serious flaws is guilty of "bias," but that ain't me.

In preparing to write an article covering Duran-Leonard I, I spent days on end finding and recording statements that both Leonard and Dundee are on record as saying before the fight in Montreal. I found an about-face in what they said before as compared to what they said afterwards. I drew conclusions based on the evidence. Incidentally, before examining it, I had a different view as to what happened in that fight and had to reject it in the face of what became clear.

Duran greater than both Leonards? I believe it so. Duran a hero...? Hell no. Bias? Where? My views on Duran couldn't be further from, say, Hauser's on Ali.

 

Here's a great clip of Leonard admitting defeat to Hearns face to face.


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUbhRMgScbA[/ame]

 

I see your points, but Terry was not that defensive and when he moved around the ring he sometimes wasted time hoping up and down without going anywhere. Simon Brown wobbled him with a jab and stopped him. Curry was beaten by Terry, but Terry was clocked easily several times. The Meldrick fight was Meldrick not being able to fight a guy as fast and big as Terry. Terry was offensive which is what made him good, but his defense was overrated, which is why he was stopped a couple of times and hurt many times. Terry beating Ray in 1991 is not close to Tommy fighting Ray 10 years earlier. Terry beat the name Ray Leonard, but not really Ray Leonard. Ray had disrespected boxing for years by handpicking and not really fighting regularly. I give Terry credit for beating Ray, but why wouldn't he have beaten him?

I see your points but I do not know if Terry could bang and move with the best of them. Julian Jackson and Simon Brown he did not bang with well. He was a good fighter, but very flawed. The great thing about Norris is handspeed and a warrior mindset.

 

Hi Terry :hi: If you are Terry Norris I'm a big fan and think you're underrated