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

cant you find another forum to do your trolling? why does it have to be this one?

 

I see you baby, (shakin' that ass) under that bridge :rofl

 

If a prime Leonard could walk through Hearns' best punches, best believe he could do the same to Norris.

The Leonard of 91 had lost all his reflexes, his timing, his handspeed, and his legs. He was a COMPLETELY different fighter than he was in 81, and if you cant see that you're either 1. Stupid 2. On Terry's dick way too hard, or 3. Both.

Just because the 91 Leonard couldnt hurt Norris, doesnt mean the prime Leonard wouldnt be able to. Ray still had decent handspeed when Norris fought him, but his punches no longer had the snap he had in his prime. Similar to the current version of Roy. Roy still has fast hands, but his punches lack the snap he had in his prime.

Put it this way... the Leonard left hook that wobbled Hearns in the 6th round, would have put Norris on his back.

Your arguement is ******ed. And based on it, I guess we can say that Keith Mullings, and Lauret Boudanani would beat a prime Norris.

 

Xplosive, I totally see it this way too. To even insinuate that Leonard of `91` is even remotley close to the `81` version,shows a complete lack of boxing knowledge. Without question, Thomas Hearns had WAY more explosive power than Norris, and Hearns had sensational boxing skills. Leonard had to will his way through Hearns piston like jab, almost nuclear right hand, and deal with his 78`` reach. What Rooster fails to recognize, is that midway in this fight. Noriis fragile chin would let him down, yet again. SRL had the speed, ring savvy and POWER to KO Norris. If an incredibly average Mullings, and an ok fighter like Brown could cleanly stop a prime Norris. How could a primed, much better caliber fighter like Leonard not be able to? Leonard would have some real problems with Norris speed and athleticism at first. But, he would keep walking him down, digging to that body, and with his exceptional hand speed, eventually start getting to Norris.At some point he would hurt Norris, and when he did... Norris had HORRID recovery skills, and SRL had exeptional finishing skills.Norris, once you truly hurt him, the fight was over. Rooster, you are saying that SRL, had less punch and finishing skills than Mullings and Brown? You just can`t be serious. Leonard was stopped once,after a 5 yr. layoff. And he fought some huge hitters in his career. Speed for speed: close, power: SRL, chin ha,ha we know that one. Rooster answer me this, how could extremely average fighters like Mullings and Brown, get to (and stop) Norris? And you are saying that SRL doesn`t have the skills or power to do the same? SRL would do it to Norris easier and faster than both of those two. Are you in fact saying that Mullings and Brown were better than SRL???? And are you saying that a ten yrs. younger SRL would fare no better against Norris? Hagler and Hearns would have wiped the floor with Norris...

 

As I said, your only option is to make Norris' chin an issue. Well I can do the same. How is that Kevin Howard who is much smaller than ray, was able to put him on the floor?

Dont bring up his age either because he was only 27 and this was three years before he beat Hagler.

Why was Geraldo, the weakest of the middleweights, able to stagger Leonard and sent him stumbling backwards across the ring? How is it that every time Ray was in the ring I saw him getting dropped?

And you know Terry was far quicker and more powerful than Marcos.

i also recall Marcos having an ever worse chin than Terry - ko'd 6X in the first round alone at the time he fought leonard. And he took Leonard's best shots for all 10 rounds without blimking

Now what are you going say to me? :smoke

 

Well to be fair to Norris... he was shot when he lost to Mullings. I highly doubt Mullings beats the early 90's Norris. But the rest of your post I agree with. Leonard KO's Norris prime for prime. And this isnt an insult to Norris. Terry was a brilliant fighter at his best, but Leonard was a level above him.

 

Nobody seen the Mullings loss coming. Norris was performing nicely with a proposed De La Hoya superfight just around the corner. I don't think he was shot at all. That fight clearly showed us that he suddenly came to pieces down the stretch. It's not as if he showed any signs of being shot for as long as the fight lasted. Norris was pretty much in control before being stopped.

 

Kevin Howard really shook Leonard with that punch! Perfect shot

 

Red Rooster, Leonard was always getting dropped? Quite an exaggeration. How about Norris always getting stopped? He could not recover... As for the Mullings fight, I think its fair to say that SRL was more of a shot fighter than Norris was for Mullings. I just have a hard time labeling a chinny fighter, great. Any fighter who took what SRL did in the first Hearns fight, stay on his feet, and come back to win. Is not chinny. Hell SRL even managed to climb off the deck against Hearns in fight 2.

 

Based on what fight, Kalule? That's one fight and Kalule wasn't even that good. Even Davey Moore with ten fights knocked him out. You think Davey can knock out Terry also?

Wayne said he was going to walk down Terry. Well how come he didnt walk down Geraldo? Geraldo's a wimp and the only one wound up hurt in that fight was Ray.

By you saying Norris gets kod by Ray actually is an insult to him because I never seen Leonard leave behind a trail of broken bodies at superwelter while Terry did. If you feel so confident about him knocking out Terry, just point out all his victims at 154.

 

You said "who has the better chin? We all know that!" :yep That's what you said.

You dismissed Terry without a second thought as tho fact, while looking the other way when it came to leonard. I simply pointed out how Ray was vulnerable. And you know what else? The fact that even a shot Hearns (this was proven beyond all doubt in the Kinchen fight) with extra weight on him was able to drop leonard. He was was simply too light at 145 just like I said :yep

Regarding leonard's condition going into the Norris fight. You better be prepared to back up that argument. You said "I think it's fair to say that SRL was more of a shot fighter than Norris was for Mullings"

How is that? Because the fact is, he dominated Duran and showed no lack of foot speed or movement. Steve Farhood said he fought the perfect fight. So how does someone dominate Duran while fighting the perfect fight if he's shot? If Duran wasn't much at the time Ray beat him then Mullings wasn't much at the time he beat Terry. So if Ray were really shot by the time, he would have showed a lot more signs of struggling.

And as I recall, Ray hadn't lost a fight in 11 years and while dominating his last opponent-Duran, won every round. So how do you arrive at "I think it's fair to say that SRL was more of a shot fighter than Norris was for Mullings"?

I don't think it's fair to say that at all. I think it's completely biased. It's completely untrue and you know it.

 

Bang on the money.

 

This is a good thread, lots of varied opinions. In boxing, anything is possible. Meaning on any given night, either fighter could win. As for Geraldo he was a funny kind of fighter. Gave Hagler 10 tough rds and Leonard. Then gets blown out quickly by Hearns. Kalule at the time, was the best of the jr. middles. Boxing is funny, styles make fights...

 

you have yet to prove he lost his reflexes. If you were so confident of what you say you could tell me how a shot fighter could fight the perfect fight as described by Steve Farhood in uno mas. I think Farhood being the knowledgable writer that he was knew a thing or two about shot fighters.

He wrote it. It's in print and it's too late to change his story after Terry destroyed him.

And it's funny there was no mention of it before the Norris fight. Maybe that's why they installed him a 3-1 favorite.

Another question for you Xplosive. Are 3-1 favorites looked at as shot fighters?

you're telling me he's shot without even giving one reason. This sort of thing shouldn't be so hard to prove.

On top of that you're telling me that I'm stupid for not believeing you. When you offer some proof to back your claims I'll believe you but in the meantime, Terry Norris thoroughly whipped a legend that hadn't lost a fight in 11 years. :smoke

Ray put up a good fight for one or two rounds but Terry had more inside where it counts and the arsenal he unloaded was too much for Leonard. he had never seen anything like it before in his life.

All this time he'd been facing slow lethargic fighters like Hagler and the turtlish and hittable straight up European style fighter Ayub kalule from the 1970s. yes it's true that Hagler was a once great fighter, but that was a long time before Leonard got to him.

Put it this way...the right hand that Howard landed on leonard and landed him flat on his back is proof postive that Terry would have had his way with Ray easily.

The fact that Geraldo staggerred him the way he did is yet more proof that Terry would keep Ray in line all night. And the fact that ray could not hurt Geraldo is proof that Ray could not hurt Terry either...because Geraldo can't take a punch as we all know.

End of story

 

Look at the obvious difference here.

One guy simply "hit the canvas", the other guy was STOPPED outright.

Huge difference.

Norris was stopped almost as often as Leonard simply went down.