Thoughts on Oba Carr

I do agree that Starling-Carr would be a quality bout in all honesty. I just find the notion of your post ridiculous.

 

***

 

I'm not getting into a debate with you. You have proven time and time again you reach to validate your weird opinions with irrelevant information.

 

****

 

You know who I mean? The one where Starling looks just as lethargic as he did in his fights earlier on that you claimed he was pre-prime in?

 

Carr was nowhere near as good as Curry.

A physically feeble, small Welter with solid, tidy boxing skills for about 7-8 rounds at most then his sharpness would drop right off.

mediocre power, very little infighting ability.Average speed for 140\147.

He was overhyped on the way up though it died down a bit after his pathetic effort against a washed up Bramble, who manhandled him with ease.

Fought well for about 4-5 rounds against Tito then faded feebly.Best performance awas against Quartey, good stuff there...though that last challenge against Oscar was a gimme for Oscar as he'd looked a faded fighter the past couple of years and looked like it when he fought a sloppy, flat-footed fight against Oscar, who turned in a sub-par effort.A low quality fight all-round imo.

Carr wasn't in Starling's class either, though he IS the kind of stylist that could well have run him very close, or got a debatable close decision if Marlon decided to stay in first gear and clown, as he often did against lower-output movers.

I have my doubts he'd beat McCrory or Jones either, though that's the kind of fighter he would make interesting, debatable fights with.

 

*8*

 

Dubblechin is the new 'worst poster on the forum'.

 

Thanks.

 

How about taking the middle road? You could argue that curry was better head to head but would get similar results if he switched careers with Carr. Carr would likely do worse than Curry against that line up though, especially against Starling. Carr basically never beat anyone good...that's a bigger issue than his loses.

 

It's not about pure physical dimensions, Carr looked the weaker man in many of his fights, especially as soon as his opposition went above journeyman level.He was manhandled by natural lightweight Bramble, struggled physically with fighters the level of Coley, Rodriguez, Anthony Jones, pedro Sanchez, even old Randall to an extentetc...to say nothing how physically strained he looked against genuinely strong top Welterweights like Tito and Quartey

Curry on the other hand generally seemed strong and imposing at the weight, and was able to eventually push back and control infighting with one of the strongest, best 147 infighters of the modern era in Starling.He only struggled physically against Honeyghan, by which time he had weight issues.

As for power, well i can't think of a single impressive stoppage Carr had against a good welterweight.The shootout with Rodriguez was probably his best, but his power was almost never a factor when he stepped up from record padder's to anything remotely contender type quality.He never looked a puncher to me.Curry on the other hand has numerous stoppages over contender level fighters.

I strongly disagree he was just as skilled.Curry's overall technical skills were excellent..Carr's were good, hampered by his poor infighting.

His only losses might have been those three in that time frame, but he could have had another 2 or 3 on his ledger had close fights gone the other way, and got an outright gift against Bramble.

Curry being able to beat those three or not, imo is not of great relevance in a comparison between Carr and Donald.i'd pick Curry over Quartey and especially Oscar clearly btw, and favour him over Tito too, but wouldn't bet on it too much.

Carr would beat Hwang sure, though it would likely be a harder fight than Curry had considering Hwang had, if little else- a great chin at the time and wouldn't respect a thing Carr threw.Hwang took a lot of insane shots to beat Cuevas-who if nothing else could still likely hit very hard- and against big punching jr middle\middle Baek.

Can't agree he'd beat McCrory.I think out of the two overhyped Kronk fightes, Milt had more about him and his range and jab would be too much for Carr in a good fight.

And Curry's run at the top ended because his natural prime and general effectiveness as a fighter greatly diminished after the McCallum KO, likely not helped by cutting weight for too long and taking the Honeyghan beating.His balance was clearly shot after that, i really don't think it was suddenly facing the brutal power of...Rene Jacquot or Michael Nunn that stopped him re-establishing himself as a fighter, and Honeyghan by no means hit as hard as Colin Jones, anyone familiar with the British boxing scene of the time will tell you that.He was simply faded, some fighters don't last too long after tough losses and Curry was never the most durable fighter, and had a long amatuer career.

 

***

 

Not only did he never beat anyone good, he tended to significantly struggle as soon as the opposition was above lukewarm, to say nothing of those three well known title fight losses.


Dubblechin makes him seem like he was a beast cutting a swathe through the division only to be denied by true greats just that one step above.The truth is he managed to avoid the vast majority of good top ten contenders of his Welter era.

 

Starling?