Wow you're underrating Curry big time here He dominated the 147 division for 3 plus years. When did Broner ever dominate his division? You say "Curry stepped up in competition and lost." Honeyghan was not a step up. He wasn't a great fighter before he beat Curry, and he wasn't a great fighter after he beat Curry. It's like saying Mike Tyson lost to Buster Douglas "when he stepped up in competition." Both guys lost to otherwise ordinary fighters who had one great night.
I disagree with your rating of Curry quite bit if not completely. You have conveniently left out any mention of Marlon Starling who for mine was the second best 147 once Curry came to the fore and pretty much the best for a few years after Curry was beaten. The only fights he lost in a decade besides to Curry was a bout stopped on an accidental cut in the 6th and a close one to Vilella. Starling was his best scalp for mine and Jones and LaRocca are very notable as well. Respect your take but imo he's a lot bigger than you convey.
Watch how Curry takes apart Colin Jones. Or how he destroyed Larocca who if nothing else could fly around the ring and Curry crushed him in 6. Curry beat Starling pretty good in the second bout and NOBODY ever did that to Starling. Danny Garcia doesn't make it into the 8th vs a prime Curry. Same with Thurman.
It is interesting. Donald Curry really shows up something about peak and how short peaks can really be. Some people say he was overrated, but I don't think so. To this day I do not understand what happened to Donald. Why he diminished after his greatest win vs. McCrory. It was almost as if he reached the top and he couldn't meet the expectations people were putting on him. That he could move up and fight Hearns or Hagler. Or even Ray. That was a lot of pressure for him. I think he had the skills to matchup to those guys, but I don't think he was as mentally tough as those guys.
Curry was doing fine until he ran into Honeyghan. Honeyghan wasn't "ordinary" he was underrated. Curry had a certain style that proved devastating against so many fighters but every style has weaknesses. Curry didn't have an answer for the pace, pressure and elusiveness Lloyd brought to that fight, and psychologically he couldn't adapt to what was happening. Mentally after that defeat he was damaged goods. The McCallum fight was a chance to regain the old confidence but in fact it proved to be the reverse. Boxing is a cruel sport. Curry did well, very well, but he fell short of true greatness because once he lost he was never the same again. In hindsight the McCallum fight so soon after Honeyghan loss was perhaps a mistake but taking risks like that, taking meaningful fights, testing oneself, is what fans want from fighters. One punch can make or break a career at that level.
It was all mental in my opinion. We talk about a short peak but he had been unbeaten for at least 7 years and had achieved everything he was asked to for those 7 years. Undoubtedly would have been a gold medallist. People talk of the star studded 80's but lets look at who he could've fought to make a bigger profile during 84-85......perhaps Aaron Pryor? He was always manouevering towards bigger men like Hagler and Hearns. Getting back to your point yes it was mental. Weight draining and Gormans mind games for sure. Curry was the sensitive type outside the ring and it really broke his spirit I believe having Gorman try to rip him off, than brief against him to the press. I think he picked up the magazines and they all took Gormans side and he felt the racism prevalent in the era....."the white manager is always right" and black fighters being part of a "stable"....personally I think Gorman getting 28% was a disgrace..... Than in the ring being weight drained and headbutted it opened a world Curry knew nothing of.......feeling weak and helpless in the ring. Honeyghan was vastly underrated for sure. He is another guy exactly like Curry who had a very short explosive and successful "peak" both reigned at WW for 3 years..... These days lazy heads characterise Honeyghan as a wild slugger.....in fact during 83-86 he was the English Benitez he had a magnificent smooth boxing style with a radar like defence.....plus one punch power.....and heart. Look at how he outboxed Rosi before taking him out with one right hand into a concussion. The title went to Honeyghans head. Outside the ring his partying and womanising and doing weed had no end.....physically his hands were breaking up yet he decided to go with the crowd pleasing slugging style he had unveiled against Curry in defences against Bumphus,hatcher, Cheung,and Starling.......with Blocker he outboxed him because he knew Blocker had a great chin.....ironically he neglected his considerable boxing skills and it was mid point in the Starling fight he realised his mistake and tried to box and move again but it was too late he took a frightful beating........than he spends the last 6 years of his career boxing and moving but his legs were shot.......a curious odd career......but Gorman if he had been doing his job in 1986 would have let Don know this was his hardest test the unbeaten British, European and Commonwealth champion Lloyd Honeyghan
Curry was a real talent for a few years possibly the best PFP.I think he had hand trouble and honeyghan was a very dangerous fighter who was underrated possibly because he was from the Uk.During the Nunn fight was it that akakbr bloke who kept on shouting "LET THE RIGHT HAND GO!" All the way through ?.Got on my wick at the time plus curry didn't.
I'm not "underrating" Curry. I'm just not "overrating" him. Curry was a very good welterweight champ. But he wasn't great. And he's not an all-time great. There have been a lot of very good welterweight champs. Vernon Forrest was very good. Keith Thurman is very good. Buddy McGirt was very good. Curry was very good. But he wasn't a great fighter. He beat a no name to win the vacant WBA belt. He stopped the overrated McCrory for the WBC belt. The IBF created a belt and just gave it to him, he didn't even have to win it in the ring against anyone. Then he got stopped by Honeyghan. He moved up. He beat the John Ruiz of the junior middleweights Gianfranco Rosi for a belt there. Then got wasted by McCallum. Outpointed by the mediocre Jacquot. KOed by Norris. There was "nothing great" about his career. He followed Leonard. After Leonard, for some odd reason, the boxing people at the time just felt like there would be yet another GREAT welterweight coming right behind Sugar Ray. And they anointed Curry before he ever accomplished anything. If Vernon Forrest or Buddy McGirt or Keith Thurman followed Ray Leonard, they'd have beaten Jun-Suk Hwang for a vacant belt, too, and they'd have beaten McCrory for his belt as well ... and they could've all gone to the mail box and opened the package containing their new IBF belt that the org just created and sent them, like Curry did. That wouldn't have made them "great" either. Frankly, Forrest, McGirt and Thurman all arguably beat better fighters than Curry did. And nobody considers them all-time greats. Curry ruled an average welterweight class. I give him credit for being the true welterweight champ. But he wasn't great by any stretch. He had the opportunity to be great, but he didn't win those fights. He was a solid champ. But there's a difference between that and being great.
Respectfully id disagree with everything you just wrote. Comparing a forrest,mcgirt and broner to curry is only valid imo,and its an opinion, if u conclude curry was a better fighter than all of them....which he was by a country mile....hell curry would have assasinated mayorga and stopped broner. Curry was undefeated as a pro for 7 years and would have certainly been a olympic gold medalist....he beat marlon starling twice....starling in a big fight mood beats thurman,mcgirt,forrest and broner no exceptions...but you choose to dwell on starlings worst career performance against bumphus. Gianfranco rosi as the john ruiz of the lm division is very imaginitive but not a very accurate description.rosi was a far better world champion. Going back to curry your analysis of his career demonstrates someone who didnt follow his career at all. Anyone with any iota of nous about when a fighter is over the hill could see curry wasnt even 60% of what he"d been... Yet he was still handily outboxing McCallum and rocking him before the once in a career mistake which seasoned curry watchers knew was a direct result of his starting to lead with his face post WW something hed never done at WW. Yet he was still dead even with nunn after 8 rounds before gassing and nunn complimented his skills and called him the most skilled fighter he ever met years later Yet totally shot he gave norris problems Yet as a shot fighter he still beat acquino and rosi at LM. I have no doubt the curry of 1984-86 was a level above all the guys u compared him to It wasn't an average WW class.The two wins over starling were exceptional...starling went on to wipe out the very good late 80s class of honeyghan,breland and brown...curry also beat every kind of foe and demonstrated world class variety of skills....jones was a world class plodding powerpuncher.....mcrory a world class tall boxer with many world title defenses...larocca a world class runner 55-1 or something.....rosi a strong world class spoiler who went on to hold the title again for 6 years and won the ibf and wbo titles to add to the wbc title curry massacred him for....acquino....all these guys were a above average WW pool ....if not of course srl/duran/hearns ....or the whittaker/odlh/quartey/trinidad WW era.....the 1985 don curry would be a top 5 fighter in any ww era Unlike the limited ,weak in areas guys like broner and forrest ,Donald could handle every type of foe
I don't understand how he did that. Hagler would have really fought Curry instead of Leonard? Hagler already was going to fight Hearns in November, and Hagler vs. Ray pushed that aside. And somehow Curry things Ray prevented him from fighting Hagler?
