Sugar Ray Leonard v Terry Norris prime for prime

leonard had the far better chin which is why Terry dropped him twice and Terry stayed upright w/o so much as blinking

ray's comp was far superior to Terry's and blah blah blah!

even so, you'd much rather be boasting about this; Which fighter has the "W"

obvious troll baiting but what the hell, I get hard ons doing this

BOOOIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNGG!

 

Dude do you really realized how flawed that ****ogy is?????

So Ali loses to Frazier -
Frazier gets blown away in 5. So based on your ****ogy foreman should have destroyed Ali - Right

Leonard wars with Duran first time
Outboxes him second time but not destroying him .. So your ****ogy would have it a close fight between hearns Duran since Leonard stopped hearns in a close fight .. But wait it was a 2round massacre

Let me see there's more Vernon Forrest beats Shane Mosley twice

Gets stopped by mayorga losses twice

So your idiotic ****ogy would have it mayorga beats Mosley right - but twice Mosley stops mayorga - there is hundreds more like that dude..

You can't judge the content of one fight and carry that over to another and summarize that because boxer a went 9 rounds with boxer b and boxers c went 3 rounds only with boxer b, that boxer c is better .. That's called not knowing a dammm thing about boxing. But lowering myself to your level of boxing iq is the equivalent of what my father always said "who is the bigger dummy, the dummy or who argues with a dummy"!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Yep Norris was a great fighter he was never inactive like Ray was but got stopped by that all time great keith mullings, previously beaten by Derrick KELLY ..lol. Simon brown put him
To sleep
And Jackson decapitated him
Both of these were peak Norris right ..lol buff said


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

youre not going to shake anyone's confidence with arguments like that

you cant prove anything by comparisons between different fighters from different eras

i look for a fighter's strong and weak points and

and judging by ray's performance in the Bonds, & Hearns fights, it wasnt hard to find his weak point

a good strong counterpuncher, especially when on the retreat, he likes the other man to come to him

but when forced to take charge, he's far from what is required for a Terry Norris

I'm sorry bro, I'd like to agree with you but if ray didnt have the right stuff to take fights with Pryor, Nunn, or a prime Hagler, then he's not good enough for Norris either or even give him a fight

 

no worse than rey being man handled by Camacho, a guy three sizes smaller

next to srl, hector resembled a raging bull

and I'm just talking truth bro. it's all there in living color for all to see

 

Benetiz. 38-0-1 winner at jr welter welter and super welter considered top 50-60'all time many all timd pound per pound 20-24 yrs old
Hearns - 32-0 when they faced -30 ko.. Was a career welter at time - went on to win titles at super welter to light heavy -was 22-24 yrs old at time - top 20 all time pound per pounder
Duran - 72-1 had not lost since 72 -and avenged that loss twice - was only 28 - had 8 fights at welter, went on to win super welter and middle weight -- top 5 all time pound per pounder
Hagler - 62-2-2 has not lost in 10 years avenged his losses and draws- top 2-3 dominant middle weight all time, undisputed had just stopped all contenders except 1 of last 12 bouts... Ray moved up after no fights but 1 in 5 years , moved up 2 weight classes... Beat him.. Hagler only 32 years old - top 20 all time pounder

You want to compare resume's????





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

let's see; if fighter A beats fighter C but loses to fighter B....

BULLSPIT!

I seen that article back in a 1984 KO mag and the idea spread down thru out the years, becoming popular with neophytes with nothing else in their bag of tricks

rooster of course, needs no such gimmicks, relying on others ideas

I am superior to the writers you invoke, whose ideas you steal

the fact is, you dont even know what you're talking about

 

Maybe you need to do your research
Ray offered Aaron Pryor - it was Pryor who turned diwn the fight

Hagler was sooooo shot that he lost too.... Hmmm Derek KELLY ,, oops no that was Norris, maybe Simon brown, that was Norris again, maybe it was keith mullings ...hmmm that would be Norris again.. So just who did he lose too , or draw too, or get dropped by, or even last the distance ...

Your getting your old ass, scrabble playing in the seniors home ass handed to him

Learn boxing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Yeah sure you are. We see the evidence on display here ....smh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I dont have to compare resumes; Terry's got the win remember?

Norris 120

srl
106

Baby hurting? aww, too bad! :|

 

you dont want to look at the evidence

Norris 120

srl

106

cheer up tho, srl had all that top tier experience

(but Norris had all the speed!)

 

Trevor Berbick beat Ali too, Robinson lost 10 times or so past peak.. So your point is.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I dont quite understand your point, which has been used by dozens of others using the famous Ali-Berbick fight which, doesnt apply here

so your point is....:-(

 

Your dementia is getting worse bro, better take your med's. It perfectly applies,,

Your suggesting Norris beat Leonard so he is better ok,,, Your view

I am comparing

Berbick he beat a shot Ali

So I am saying Berbick is better than Ali by your ****ogy...

Wasn't it you that said a 32 year old Hagler was shot, so invalidating that Ray victory,

But on the other hand a 36 year old Leonard who had 5 fights in 9 years, was perfectly ok...

LOL>.......... GTFO,,,, your too much comedy today


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

i'm not suggesting it; it's how contests are won - man to man

which is how you prefer to have it done since you constantly use Hagler, Hearns, Duran, Benitez to brag about him

and in the same way I use Terry's easy conquest of rey

note that I dont do it the moron's way, like you, comparing fighters from different eras, then concluding the winner must automatically be leonard

that's the bullsht/soreloser way and I dont want to be wrong like you

not when I can be perfectly unbiased and factual just by pointing to the score:

Norris 120

srl 106