Terry Norris .Vs. Ray Leonard ('81 Version).

I just can`t see any version of Norris beating the `81` Leonard. Leonard was faster, had a much better chin, and I think he`d grind him down. The older version of Leonard couldn`t match speed with a younger Norris. `81` version of SRL was faster than Norris. Leonard UD, of late tko if Norris gets cocky

 

if he had a much better chin why was he always on the canvas?

Faster than Terry? Forget it. Ray could never match Terrys speed even on his best day

 

Yeah sure. You're talking about 3-1 favorite ray Leonard-the hollowed out fighter :-(

Waynegrade I ask you:

How does a fighter dominate Duran in the ring if he's shot himself?

How does a hollowed out fighter put on a "masterful performance"?

How does a hollowed out fighter fight the "perfect fight" as described by Steve Farhood?

Who was favored to win the fight?

and most of all, how is Ray going to get Norris to stand still long enough for him to work him downstairs?

Sounds great in theory but putting it in practice is what counts and he wasnt able to do that.

What's more, you are ignoring the fact that Ray had a shaky chin himself. If you watch the early fight ray had with Fireball rodriguez and again with Geraldo (1979) you will see Ray and Terry are on equal terms.

The problem is wihen you are discussing Ray leonard, his fans stay away from asnwering questions like this. Leonard himself overlooked these points and that's why he found himself overtaken the way he was in the Norris fight.

Ray wanted to fight Norris and was picking a fight with him. The only problem was he picked a fight with the wrong guy. This happens all the time in real life.

Ray got cocky and believed his press clippings. He was looking for another softy like Lalonde and thought he'd push his luck and Terry upset the odds.

 

Norris was faster??????????????????? Ray never was clean knocked out. Wake up, Thomas Hearns would have leveled Norris in 2 rds! Yes, 2 rds. Leonard took those shots and still came back to win. On second thought your right. Leonard was WAY overrated... And you think SRL was even close to his prime against Norris??? You are saying the `81` version of SRL is about the same as the version who fought Norris? That is ludicrous to even say...

 

Julian Jackson said it was quite difficult to reach Norris....

 

Anyone who beats a prime time Benitez and Hearns, is not living off his press clippings.

 

I asked you to answer a few questions to help me understand where you are coming from and as I thought you couldnt give a straight answer with no idea where to start. I can understand from where you're sitting.

Nevertheless, I'll give you one more chance to answer and avoid losing face.

who was favored to win the fight-Ray or Terry?

Morevoer, Ray was winning wasnt he?????? How does that make him a hollowed out fighter?

I call a hallowed out fighter someone like Angel Espada, a stepping stone going up against Tommy Hearns. Clyde Gray. Andy Price-people going nowhere in their careers, not recently crowned world champions. Not recently established as five time champion.

Tommy Hearns is another hollowed out fighter carefully chosen for his rematch with Sugar Ray. People that've been knocked around a few times, ko'd, that sort of thing.

Fact: Ray Leonard had not lost in 11 years, was a 5 time champion and Terry beat the pants off of him. Dont deny it just because you hate him for being so good with his fists. Ray never had what it took to beat him anyways.

Despite the fact that Ray had been in the bigger media saturated fights, and was a five time world champion, had just dominated a legend and was chosen as an enormous favorite to destroy Norris, he didnt have the experience nor toughness to deal with Terry. He had no idea how to deal with the speed of someone so gifted and athletic that presented himself as a moving target.

 

too bad ray couldnt hit like Jackson, it would at least give him a chance of winning via last minute KO.

 

Thats EXACTLY what I do expect him to do.
Norris dont hit like Hearns but I know from experience Im not gonna change your mind, you think Norris would beat SRL prime v prime... I do not & will never think that as I have seen both men fight.

:good

 

In 1981, Sugar ray Leoanrd defeated a very young, and very frail looking Thomas hearns, not yet ready for prime time. It's not his fault Tommy was 3 years from his peak

However, it was his fault for taking a rematch against Tommy when he reached the status of an invalid.

As for Wilfred Benitez, who the hell was he?

 

You may have watched both men but you dont understand certain nuances of the sport that makes one fighter more successful than most others.

how do you expect Leonard with his so so chin and as a so so puncher to even take him out??? The thing I really dont understand is how anyone expects Terry to stay still for him.

That's what ray was hoping for in their fight but TN is too good a fighter because when Norris got in the corners, Ray's assault on the body failed miserably as Terry just tied him up and walked him back to the center of the ring (like Camacho would do)

In short, Terry thwarted ray's attempts to cause any sustainable damage. While ray looked for openings, Terry took advantage and pitched. Or to put it another way, Terry pitched and Ray caught.

Most of the time, Terry was a moving target and we all know Ray can't hit a moving target. You surely can't land more than land more than one or two as he's moving away from you.

Fact: Terry was the master of movement

To be fair to leonard, he never stood a chance against this kind of fighter. Not only a fighter that can do so many things defensively,, and frustrate him as no one else but also to take charge, become the initiator. Terry was one of those special fighters that had the power to make his opponent do what he wanted, to make him move the way he wanted.

This was vividly illustrated in round 7 of their fight.

I'll never forget how Terry brilliantly lured leonard into his deadly trap. Terry was thinking "yeah ok, I'll let him think he get me on the ropes"

The conventional thinking on the part of Ray-follow him to the ropes and once there, cut down that tree that is Terry Norris's body. Terry just let him believe he had a chance. You could see how he was toying with him

I urge you to study that particular moment in which Ray believes he finally has Terry trapped on the ropes. It was like watching Wile E. Coyote on the trail of roadrunner-so close and yet,, and yet.. only to be outsmarted once again and run smack dab into a trigger fast right hand, depositing him on the floor.

Sheer brilliance!! And one we won't soon forget.

This content is protected

But there is only one Julian Jackson. And what Ray Leonard found out, he was no Julian Jackson.

 

Who was Wilfred Benitez ? I don`t know who was favored in SRL/Norris fight. But I do know that even though Ray hadn`t lost in years. He was light years away from the Leonard of `81`. As for a `frail` looking Hearns. He had only been running roughshod over the welterweight division. It just doesn`t make sense debating that the Leonard Norris beat was the prime Leonard. Why not just say that Marciano beat a vintage Louis. You need to compare apples to apples. Vintage SRL was MUCH faster than older Leonard. His speed was as fast as Norris(or faster). How do you think Norris wiuld have done with the frail looking Hearns?

 

It's astonishing that he see's Leonard in his prime against Norris simply because he moved around the ring, thus in his opinion it shows a fighter in his prime. Honest, thats one of his reasons. Remarkably scary indeed.

You seen Camacho's performance against De La Hoya? That must have been a prime Camacho that night, 36 years old at welterweight. He moved like a demon for the full 12 rounds. Infact, he moved so well I could have been mistaken that he was wearing a pair of rollerskates.

Adding a bit in: he's got different rules and criteria for different fighters.

 

Sure you know. Why even deny it? Ray was favored hugely to win and for good reason. He had the experience, and the crowd on his side and that's how winners are determined.

It was thought that Ray would take a few rounds to adjust to the speed of Norris before catching him in corners and begin breaking him down. Experience was key to success.

What the experts hadn't accounted for was the speed and mobility and the effectiveness of Terry's counters, and how it would tame the beast in Leonard.

Sometimes a fighter can become so dazzled by a fighter' speed that they tend to stand still and watch as the other fighter get off with rapid bursts and that's what happened with Ray. By the end of round three ray was defeated, both mentally and physically. You could see it in his eyes-he didnt want it anymore.

To be sure, prime Ray Leonard had great speed but Terry had PHENOMENAL speed that dwarfed leonard's.

 

Wilfred was an okay fighter but there was nothing special about him. he lost every time a major fighter came his way. Sure he beat Duran in 1982 but....didn't Kirkland laing?

Like I said, nothing special.

As for Hearns, outside of Cuevas who did he really beat? Did anyone check out WHO his opponents were?

Jim Richards :huh

Angel Espada-a shell

Baez-a tuneup if I ever saw one

Gray-ex contender from another era

Jose Figueroa :huh

To be sure Tommy displayed a nice jab in his first big fight and decent poise but too many question marks about him that could not be answered based on his weak experience such as chin, strength, late round stamina and as had been predicted, fell apart late.