Terry Norris’ wins over Sugar Ray Leonard, Donald Curry, and Meldrick Taylor

I thought they were great wins, over guys who were not at their best in age Ray and Donald, or weight Taylor. But the speed of Norris hands made it so that he was going to test the chins of those guys and see if they were old or too high in weight, and none of them could handle it

 

* Meldrick Taylor was undersized and just not the same after the JCC fight.
* Curry was shot to shreds and coming off a hard loss to Nunn at middleweight.
* Leonard was past his best and coming down two weight divisions.

Norris did perform well against them, but all three were there to be taken (for different reasons) at that point.

 

I feel the same way too. He utterly dominated when the experts said he couldnt and then had the experts crying in their soup yelling "foul"

people just cant accept certain things in life but judging Terry from his previous fights, I could see he had the greatness not only to win but to make it looks easy

and that's how things turned out in the leonard fight; it went all Terry's way

and might I add that Terry had so much speed, he didnt know what to do with it

Leonard's rep and reputation want a factor here; only Terry's fight plan and hand and foot speed was

 

I tried to get Terry Norris on the Texas Sports Hall of Fame ballot, a few years back. Unfortunately, the so-called "great sportswriters" really don't understand what these great athletes give up for their fans.

Norris was both a top amateur, and pro world champ.
"A star baseball player during his high school years, Norris bypassed a career on the diamond for one in the ring, amassing a stellar 291-4 amateur record and winning 4 Texas State Golden Gloves titles. Displaying a stunning combination of hand and foot speed as well as the ability to throw dizzying combos, Norris' athletic ability was an uncanny attribute in the ring.

Norris was originally from Lubbock, TX

 

Norris was very talented. Terrific speed and power. His problem was a dicey chin. He did decisively beat all three but all three were at varying degrees of the downsides of their career. Ray was over thirty four coming off another long layoff and got cute one time too many. Terry beat him up and ray showed a ton of heart to last the distance. Prime for prime Ray takes Terry out. Curry was faded and Taylor should not have been in that ring at all.

 

Curry was FAR from his best and have Norris a fight.
Leonard was shot.
and Taylor should have never been in the ring with Norris .
it's like Pat Lawlor going around bragging he beat both Benitez and Duran but leaving out the part of how badly faded the two were.

 

this amounts to nothing more than sour grapes your words "Taylor should not have been in the ring at all" gives proof of it

Was Meldrick not champion at that time???

was he not a mere 25 yrs and only 8 years into his pro career?

what basis do you have form making such claims????

Also, was Leonard not favored to win his fight with Norris??? I didnt see anyone from the press saying otherwise

Did you? what basis do you have to say "Ray takes Terry out"? Everyone is entitled to their belief but I'm curious as to how you can back up there claims. This "long layoff" is in actuality just over one year and considering the one fight in five years vs Hagler and how he fared in that fight, that too has to be dismissed in favor of Terry's speed and talent, his feistiness the factors. In other words, Ray didnt lose the fight; Terry won it overwhelmingly

You cant even make a case for "prime Ray" beating Norris since there's nothing in their actual fight you can point to you can say Ray would exploit

Exactly what would Ray capitalize on?

Terry's non stop movement? How would he get Terry to stay put and fight like Ayub Kalule?

How would he prevent Terry from tying him up in close?

Would he make Terry's hand speed to slow enough so he could counter him safely?

you're full of baloney - period. Just face the facts; Terry ruled him and there was no way you can beat him

 

how was leonard shot if in his previous fight, he won every round using his legs in effortless fashion to keep off the ropes

Is boxing and moving for 12 rounds straight evidence of being shot?

IMO there as too many biased posters here masquerading as "knowledgeable posters" who let their bias speak for them and that is why they never give any support.

Terry would whip any of those guys; McCallum, Leonard, Kalule, etc etc, and 1987 Hagler? NO PROBLEM!!

It's like my man Terry might say "I've got so much speed, I dont know what to do with it!"

 

Sure.

 

Keith Mullings deserves a great deal of credit for knocking out a prime Terry Norris. How old was Terry 28? Is there any version of Norris that doesn't squat and pee when Mullings name is mentioned? I don't think so.

 

Your man? There's the problem. Let's start with go straight to the canvas when hit on the chin. We saw that a few times. That's not
Supposed to happen that often.

 

Hit the other guy after he goes down is another one.

 

What? No Brett Lally or Pat Lawlor mentions? EDIT: I see a Lawlor post above. Good work fellas!

I thought all the wins were good. Leonard would always be troubled by Terry although 91' Leonard was done.

Curry was a slightly better win because Donald performed well and came to fight. He wasn't as past it as Leonard was. Faded sure, but not completely done.

Taylor might be the best win but Meldrick coming up in weight and also struggling against Luis Garcia and Glenwood Brown in his previous bouts made him "Taylor" made for Terry that night. Still, Norris bludgeoned him.

All good victories.