Thoughts On Terry Norris?

Okay, I almost edited that out. Joshua was the first that came to my mind as a comparison.
I will try to explain it better...... AJ, and Norris, doesn´t have the firmness necessary to sustain a tough fight, muscles and all that are one thing, firmness are another thing, their body can break down once things get hard in a hand to hand combat. The best example of what I meant are the african fighters like Sam Peter or Ike Ibeabuchi, take a look at them, or someone like Marcos Maidana. They are not mentioned as athletic types, right ? Or they are, I don´t know, but to me they are much more athletic than someone like AJ or Norris.

 

What you mean ? When Norris was around ? There was no boxing forums when he was fighting.... or did I really live in a deliverance type of place back then ?

 

I think athletic ability and durability are two completely different things mate.

Norris didn’t lack will, he just couldn’t take a really big shot. Most people forget that he actually beat the count when arguably the hardest hitting 154lbs fighter ever hit him flush with a two right hands. He also tried to get up against Brown.

Norris never bowed out or gave up, he was just rendered unconscious a few times against big punchers. It’s not a lack of character.

 

It´s not durability that I meant, it is raw strenght and physical toughness. They are not the same to me. Some guys have enough stamina that they have good durability because of it. Tim Bradley comes to mind. Jake LaMotta was not physically strong but he was durable because of I don´t know what, a combination of many things I guess.
All his muscles, many of the muscles Joshua has were not meant to be his, he has them because of extra hard work in that department.
So I meant more the actual natural built, the good genes of someone that is just naturally strong. Ike Ibeabuchi´s body was expecting to pack all that muscle from day one so when things go hard his body is confortable, it is what his ancestors gave to him. His body is wired to sustain a hard tough struggle.
lol I got nuts here, sorry.
You may be right about being just a matter of his brain getting shut down and there is nothing he could do it consciously after that.
But to me he just looks crumbly when compared with some others.

 

lol - no friend, I meant that I lurked across forums when people overrated Norris to superman status.

 

It’s possible ! - I didn’t pay much attention to posters names or what have you.

 

Top 5 JMW, also despite the fact he achieved a good amount, he actually underachieved. Kinda like Tyson, he could've got a lot more out of his career were he more focused/dedicated.

 

I think it's a little absurd to rank Hearns above Norris at this weight.

What are your thoughts @Greg Price99?

 

Hey Addie,

It depends what you mean mate.

H2H peak for peak at 154lbs, I'd make Hearns favourite.

Who was the greater LMW based solely on their fights in that division? It depends on whether you prefer the quality from Hearns's 5 x world title fights, wins over Benetiz and Duran in particular rank very highly, or the quantity and greater depth from Norris's 19 x LWM WT wins.

I've only completed thorough research and analysis, and created all time top 20's, in the original 8 weight divisions, but I think if I did the same at LMW I'd rank Norris higher, based solely on the number of wins in fights contested in that division, many more LMW title defences and much more depth in quality in their respective LMW win resumes, even if Hearns best 2 x wins at the weight are arguably better than Terry's.

P4P, based on their entire respective careers across all weights, it's a no contest, imo, Hearns every time.

 

In terms of targeting smaller/past-it fighters, Flo mentioned Leonard, Curry and Taylor, but Norris also had the likes of Brown, Pettway, Mugabi, Waters, Drayton, Blocker and the like on his ledger who were either faded, smaller or both. It's hard to shake the notion of him being a devious, flat-track bully, great though he could be to watch when he was letting his hands go.

I think his inconsistent focus, defensive naivety, lack of emotional discipline and poor ring IQ were a bigger problem for him than a crackable chin tbh.

 

I just watched Leonard's fights with Norris and Camacho this past week. I couldn't stand Leonard back then so I was very satisfied watching both fights. The Camacho fight more so because he stopped SRL.

 

Norris has more depth at the weight obviously but he never truly beat a top 154 pounder, alot of his best wins were fighters moving up in weight or fighters past their prime.

And whilst Hearns's win over Duran was a fighter who moved up in weight aswell, Duran still had success at above 154 and was never dominated like that ever and Benitez was a great 154 pound fighter himself.

So the pros for Hearns is that he arguably has two of the best wins ever at 154 with the most impressive dominant display ever at 154 over an ATG in Duran. Not too mention Hearns is rated as probably the best H2H fighter ever at 154.

Pros for Norris are 19 championship wins and way more depth than Hearns its the age old question do you prefer quantity or quality.

 

Norris is a bit overrated in general imo. One of those Arturo Gatti type HOF picks, albeit with a better resume on paper. Not comparable to Hearns at 154, who would have sparked him.

 

Good post.

I think it's worth contextualising the Benitez win though. Yes, Benitez was absolutely world class at this weight, but can you think of worse style match up for him? Benitez had to outbox his opponents to win 90% of the time and Hearns couldn't be outboxed. Likewise, I'm not convinced Duran was a truly great Junior Middleweight.

Norris gets the nod for me, but I wouldn't argue with the notion that Hearns starches him H2H.

 

Genuine question - who was smaller than Terry?

Terry Norris often weighed 154lbs or under on fight night for a lot of his title defenses didn't he? He could have campaigned at 147lbs comfortably.