Terry Norris vs Mike Tyson at 170

Mr Butt is a legend.

 

Tyson would be weight drained severely so I probably would pick Norris to win this matchup.:deal

 

Brilliant!

The only reason this guy is revered by some select few here on the Classic is because he whooped on a dead Ray Leonard. RedRooster's favorite fighter would have no doubt been a Nunn or a Starling if they were the fighters to eventually get to Ray. It's all agenda-driven wank. Norris was a good fighter, that's all, his best wins came against shopworn opposition, and he was often sparked out because of his vulnerable chin.

I'm thinking Rooster and Blanco are the same dude. Has to be.

 

I think the amputation of one of Mikes legs to make weight might slow him down, so Norris wide ud.

 

Norris was a great fighter who is the greatest offensive fighter this sport has seened who also had the speed and the athleticism to match. Hearsay and misconceptions about Norris as a fighter is why you and other don't see him the way his fans do. Now Juan Marquez is a great fighter but his best wins came against shopworn fighters, but you and most people make no mention of that, gee I wonder why.:-(

 

The greatest offensive fighter the sport has ever witnessed?

Good point, actually. Marquez is not as great as his Mexican contemporaries, Barrera and Morales, who fought and beat great opposition in their prime. At least Marquez beat a shopworn Barrera and Casamayor without having ever been sparked by B level fighters.

 

In his young days he only got sparked by one 'B' level fighter(Brown). The other fighter he got sparked by is an 'A' level fighter and the hardest puncher the sport has seened (Jackson).

Marquez struggled against his shopworn opponents, Terry dominated his and knocked them out for the most part, but what else can you expect from the greatest offensive fighter of all time.:hi:

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Terry Norris has great success outboxing Tyson at every opportunity, using his superior hand and footspeed to remain a step ahead of Tyson who seems befuddled by Norris until knocking him out cold at the end of round one.

 

Come on man, we can disagree on the greatness of Terry Norris but 'The greatest offensive fighter ever'. Don't be a dumb ****.

Casamayor was naturally bigger than Marquez, but he was stopped for the first time in his career regardless. Likewise, Marquez had Barrera on the verge of a knockout, but I felt the competitiveness of the fight just showed how Marco would have handled a Marquez, prime for prime. Marquez never proved his greatness against terrific prime opposition, but he has done it by beating bigger opposition, and remaining effective in multiple weight divisions. Something Terry never attempted.

 

Yes I truly do believe he is the greatest offensive fighter I have seened, the guy did it all on offense, Gil Clancy always said Terry had everything a fighter needs except an iron chin. He had every type of punch to his arsenal and was effective with all of them. So stop being a *****.

And Terry was a natural welterweight fighting in the junior middleweight division so he was exceeding his body by even fighting there most of his career. You expect him to move all the way up to 168 for the sake of "proving himself"? Give me a break, you don't hold it against Hagler for campaigning at one division for his entire career but do so against Terry, gee I wonder why that is?:-(

 

Wow. This forum has really gone to ****. I don't even have Norris beating JC Vasquez let alone Mike Tyson with a leg cut off to make 170.

Can someone point me to a group that actually knows something about the sport?

 

Gil Clancy said Terry Norris, with the exception of his **** poor punch resistance, was a complete fighter? He didn't say anything about him being the greatest offensive fighter that ever put on a pair of gloves, then? I can name several fighters who had better offensive arsenals than Terry. Heard of Robinson, Arguello, Chavez, and Leonard? There's more.

I was making an observation, a correct one. Marquez proved himself in multiple weight divisions, whereas Terry fought at Light Middleweight his whole career.

Hagler went undefeated for 11 years, and holds wins over Hamsho, Hearns, and a prime undefeated version of John Mugabi. There's many ways for fighters to prove themselves. Hagler dominated Middleweight for a number of years, Marquez has shown great longevity in being successful in multiple weight divisions, and Leonard just had the names on his resume. Terry Norris beat good opposition, albeit shopworn most of the time, and was evidently sparked out by the best fighter he ever faced.

I'm not holding it against Terry for staying at Light Middleweight, was simply saying Marquez gets rated higher by me for challenging himself against naturally bigger opposition.

 

I didn't say Clancy said he was the greatest offensive fighter I said he said he had everything a fighter needs. And get the **** outta here ***** boy by saying Chavez is a better offensive fighter than Norris. Only a dick sucker who has to pay to lose his virginity would say some dumb **** like that.

 

**** off with that **** Blanco, I didn't reveal that crap for it to brought up in Boxing related discussions. **** you and Norris, who may or may not be the same dude.

 

Tyson vs Chuck Norris? Wait never mind, there is no human or god who could beat a prime Chuck Norris.