Who was more talented Don Curry, or Howard Davis

I think it maybe didn't get mentioned much at the time John , because it generally wasn't enough of a weakness to really hinder his aggressive counterpunching style, against the opponents he fought.He always looked like he was comfortably fighting his fight, that and when he did make fighters miss it was nice and smoothly.

It's something that could cost him against other greats though.I'm thinking Arguello here especially, though Sanchez seems the consensus favourite on that one.

 

Good points. Sanchez had such a fantastic chin he soaked up big blows from punchers like Lopez and Gomez with barely a noticable flinch. If he got dropped here and there little doubt it (defense) would have been dwelled on.

Personally i favour Arguello everywhere but possibly at
Feather.

 

In the AMs Curry was 400-4.He won the olympic trials in 1980 but was denied a chance to fight due to the boycott by the US.

In the pros Curry had a very sound defense when he was at his best.Very hard to hit and countered with power.

Both in pros in Ams he was more talented then Davis.

 

I think Curry was slick and he did not have a leaky defense. Every one of those fights you just mentioned were when he was past it,or weight drained(Honeyghan) He looked awesome against Mccory,Jones,Larocca only guy I remember seeing that hit him regularly in his prime was Starling in the 1st fight and Hwang who dropped Curry. I dont think Curry was overrated at all.
I think Davis was underrated as a pro and gave Rosario a real close fight,I also thought he edged out a young Meldrick Taylor(it was a draw) . Davis could punch in the amatuers I think he kod most of his opponents in the olympics,but not so much in the Pros. He was psyched out when he traveled to the UK and lost to Watt. I was only 6 years old when he fought in the olympics so I vaguely remember seeing him,Ive seen lots of video of him and he was one of the greatest amatuer fighters ever. I remember my dad saying that he thought Davis was better in the amatuers than Leonard. Its hard to say who had more talent since stylistically they are 2 different fighters. Curry was a big puncher though.Davis had the edge in speed.But as far as overall resumes Currys was way better in the Pros.

 

Watch his career in order.The notably leaky defensive performances are almost all post-McCrory, where his balance seemed like it was deteriorating and he adopted a much wider stance because of it, i'd say the only really good performance he gave after Honeyghan derailed him was against Mike.The Santos and Montgomery fights are when the ill-timed leaning in became an issue, there was an obvious deterioration in him in those fights, with the wider stance etc.You won't see much of that in the Starling fights or anything from that period.His in fighting and glove defence up close was strong at that point.

I do think Curry always had issues with awkward unorthodox punching though.The honeyghan overhand right and some of Hwang's looping bombs for instance.

btw i'm not implying i think he was ever a great defensive fighter or aything like that.Just think you are being a bit harsh on him.

 

Take Mantequilla's advice. There's Curry up to and including McCrory and there's Curry post McCrory. I do agree with you to an extent that Curry could be hit. I wouldn't call his defense leaky though. He wanted to fight inside head to head more often than he needed too.
It sucks for Honeyghan and his fans, but there's no way that was a prime Curry that he beat. Look at there overall careers, Curry was the greater fighter.
As for the post, I'd say Curry was more talented but Davis had loads of talent. He seemed to lack the necessary desire to maximize the talent he had.
As for Sanchez. I think Sanchez was brilliant defensively. The first Lopez fight was conducted in a 16 foot ring. There was no place to hide. He took shots to land shots. I think he could be brilliant defensively when he had to but he didn't have to very often. He walked right through Gomez's power. I think Sanchez beats Arguello at 126. I'd pick Arguello at 130 simply because we didn't get to see Sanchez at 130. But I do believe Sanchez could have and would have operated more cautiously if he felt his opponents power. I just never recall hims being seriously hurt.

 

I have a fight of Salvadors where he's fighting at 129 lbs. He's wearing baby blue shorts if that helps (but he was in a few fights) but he looks no different to how he does at Feather.

Unless he can just use his boxing against Alexis at 130, I see his aggressiveness being his undoing; despite his never-changing expression, Arguello is an all-time top 5 puncher IMO; I can't see Sanchez taking THAT (which, was delivered in far more devastatingly than even Danny Lopez, who in my mind is probably THE puncher at 126)

 

Above Saddler?

 

I happen to think Curry was a great fighter during his short prime. He beat who was put in front of him. Nino Larocca maybe had a similar style to Mosely. I don't mean to suggest Larocca was in Mosely's league. I agree with you that Mosely is a tough matchup for Curry. I'm not sure how that one turns out. But Mosely's a great fighter in his own right. Mosely was more talented that Howard Davis too ;-)

 

Sanchez fught a non-title fight against Nico(Nicky) Perez in '81. I'd guess that's the one he came in at 129. I don't know what to call it, maybe instinctual is the word I'm looking for, and Sanchez was one of, if not the most instinctual fighter I've ever seen. He had all the attributes that could trouble Arguello. Maybe read between the lines and see where I'm leaning, but I just don't think it's fair to pick Sanchez above Arguello at 130 or above. I didn't see enough evidence (although you're right, I just was a few minutes of that fight on youtube and Sanchez looks the same).