Sugar Ray Leonard v Terry Norris prime for prime

It shouldn't need explaining.. You had two semi retired fighters who were both either mid or late 30's and in the last fight or couple fights of their careers.. Common sense should solve the riddle without needing me to give you an elaborate response, which in all likelihood you're hoping will give you something to hinge on..

Start a poll asking if both of those guys were shot. I think you'll be surprised at the overwhelming number of "yes's" you'll receive.

I just did.

Almost 35.. My bad.

It was an error.. And being 3 months shy of 35 was still quite a bit older than Norris was when he got his ass handed to him by three Grade B fighters.. Why not comment on that?

It wasn't absurd at all.. In fact if memory serves, while watching Norris vs Leonard ( though its been about 25 years ), Ferdie Pachecho made a reference to Leonard looking the way Ali did against Holmes and Berbick.

That wasn't my claim and I've gone over this several times.. My claim about Leonard's run was that it ran from 1979 to 1981 during which time he beat Duran, Benitez, Hearns, and Kalule.. Facing Davey Green and Larry Bonds in between taking on elite opponents were meant to be stay busy fights and not ones that I'm building my case on... The fact that you feel the need to keep bringing up Larry Bonds like its actually something to hang one's hat on looks like desperation on your part.

Other than a minor miscalculation of Leonard's age ( ONE YEAR ), oh and confusing SANTANA for MONTANA, I don't see any factual errors or falsehoods on my part.. The real deceit here is your decade long diatribe at trying to paint Sugar Ray Leonard as being prime in 1991, which is something that probably about 95% of most knowledgeable boxing fans and experts would ( and have ) laugh at..

 

wrong. Lennard was 34, Ali was 39

and leonard wasnt semi retired, had recent fights with Hagler, Lalonde, Hearns, Duran

or had you forgetten?

why dont you learn to tell the truth for once instead of relying on fabrications?

 

No it was right. I said " either mid or late 30's." Leonard was 3 months shy of 35 which in my book is mid 30's. Ali was 39 which is late 30's. What's the problem?

He had fought FIVE times in NINE years and his last bout was FOURTEEN months earlier. Leonard's career was being conducted on a fight by fight basis without any real commitment to the sport. Sounds pretty Semi-retired to me.. And you consider the Hagler bout of four years earlier as recent?

Not at all. But I know how to put things into proper context and understand that averaging less than one fight a year over the course of a decade doesn't amount to being a full time professional, hence " semi-retired."

You mean like Leonard was prime because he beat a 37 year old Duran 14 months earlier?

 

I asked for PROOF, not opinions

If I wanted opinions, I'd ask for them

I referred to his previous bout with Duran as proof. In which rounds did rey show signs of wear. If he was shot to ****, which of the rounds does it show?

 

Where's your proof that Leonard was prime against Norris? Sounds like an opinion to me.

You've been asking for them for 10 years by trolling with this garbage and its grown quite tiring.. Can't you find another hobby?

Yes a fight where he outclassed a man who was even older than he was, sustained multiple cuts in the process and left the fans booing the affair.. This was fourteen months prior to Norris and he did nothing in the interim between.. Oh except dehydrate himself to slim down to a weight that he hadn't made since 1984 or earlier.

 

you're ducking the question again

what physical signs in his previous bout did lennard show in which he came into the Norris bout shot to ****?

 

Look, I caught another one of your "honest" mistakes!

only ONE cut was suffered

isn't that something how your mistakes always seem to bend in your favor?

while we're at it, care to tell me exactly WHY lennard was booed?

what exactly was he being booed for?

 

btw, lennard took off 35 months between Howard & Hagler and he did just fine

with only 14 months in between, you'd think lennard would put up more of a fight

Hmm :huh

explain please

 

Taken from Boxrec:

"Leonard suffered three cuts during the fight: A headbutt in the fourth round cut his lower lip (it required 10 stitches), a right in the 11th cut his right eyebrow (it required 30 stitches) and a left in the 12th cut his left eyelid (it required 20 stitches)."

and also this

"Leonard gave them artistic perfection when they wanted heated battle, and they booed lustily. "

Well at least we know you didn't see that fight.

 

Explain? does someone really have to explain that he was four years older than he was against Hagler and maybe seven years older than he was against Howard ? How about him having to slim down to a weight that he hadn't made in years? how about the cumulative rust that comes with only fighting a handful of times within a decade? How about the fact that some of his last opponents ( Duran, Hearns, and Hagler ) were ALSO past their primes... This is common sense stuff and I think you just enjoy people wasting their time repeating it to you thousands of times. How many times does this stuff need to be regurgitated before you'll finally get it?

 

That's easy.. From 1980 to 1987 he went from standing up to shots form men like Duran, Hagler, and hearns to getting decked multiple times by norris, lalonde, and an aged Hearns between 1988 to 1991. Meaning his legs were gone as were his reflexes as he was getting tagged more often.. Ferdie Pachecho also mentioned how Ray couldn't put Hearns away in the rematch when he had him in bad trouble and how that was the very definition of a "shot" fighter.. Mind you this was almost two years BEFORE he fought Norris.. Need I say more?

 

Simply impressed by the strength of this thread! Hearing 600 replies in approx one month!

Sent from my NS-P10A6100 using Tapatalk

 

Only two people have forced this much text.

 

Wow is this thread still going on ? Absurd.

Norris beat up a seriously faded Leonard.
Norris was a very talented fighter, blazing fast w terrific power and heart.
Norris had a very questionable chin.

The Norris that beat Leonard beat a Leonard that was like the Marciano versions of Walcott, Charles, Louis and Moore .. still capable of beating many guys but faded, way off their best.

A prime Ray Leonard knocks out a prime Terry Norris. Norris would be dangerous but outclassed.

Spin how you like ..