Who's the greater fighter?

I think Shane is, and would take shane to beat him by KO, Terry was real good and wish he would have fought Tito.

 

Norris would have beaten Shane. Shane had the better chin P4P for sure, there's the only advantage he holds, and at 154 he wasn't even a particularly powerful hitter, so I doubt he'd expose that in Norris. I'd take Norris to stop Shane at some point, though he may just wide UD him like he did Leonard. No way Shane wins.

As far as greater though, it's close, Norris's resume is a bit more stacked, though Shane was a bit more consistent with his performances, and has likely the better top 2 wins against DLH. I'll give Shane the edge.

 

I think Shane gets too much love on this site. I always take his lightweight reign with a grain of salt, because he fought just awful competition. We a guy's best wins come against Philip Holiday (not very good), John John Molina (fighting above his best weight), and John Brown (not very good, and above his best weight), I refrain from calling him invincible like some people do. At welterweight, he has had mixed results, and at junior middle, the results were generally negative since he lost to the best fighter he fought there, and probably could have lost to the second best in De La Hoya.

That being said, Terry fought some 'Terrible' competition also, so this is a close one. Head to head, Norris hands down. In terms of resume, it's tight, and I'm inclined to give it to Norris for the moment, but if Shane can capitalize on a win against Judah with two or three big wins to close out his career, then I'll give it to him.

 

Shane, despite being a great fighter, is and always has been very very beatable.

Terry Norris would perhaps stop Mosley, perhaps it would go to a UD. Have to agree with SweetPea in that theres such a small chance Mosley could win this fight.

Of course, depending on how people do there lists of the greats, you couldn't really argue with someone who had one over the other.

 

On resume I say Mosley

Head to head its no real contest, Norris UD 99 times out of 100

 

Don't bet on it - with that glass jaw, Norris could get starched at any time against Shane, and probably would.:yep

 

In his current state he probably would!

Shane isn't a big puncher at 154 though

 

Do you analyze the fighters at all? Do you understand anything outside of chins? Such as the fact that Mosley was far from a big puncher at 154 and would be outgunned in every area by the bigger, stronger, more powerful, better boxing/moving, quicker at the weight Norris?

 

atsch

 

Shane Mosley.

 

This is a tough one to call.

Norris's career at 154 was better than Mosley's stint at 135. He beat better opposition, faced better opposition, and had more title defenses. But Mosley also moved up successfully, winning world titles at 147 and 154, including a win over a prime Oscar De La Hoya. I'd probably give a slight edge to Mosley in terms of greatness due to the fact he's a three division champion and gave a good account of himself in every single fight. No problem with somebody saying Norris though. To me, both are 'great,' just not 'ATGs.'

Head to head at 154, Norris dominates Mosley. Too fast, too quick, too explosive, and too big. Mosley wasn't a big puncher at 154 so he would not be able to take advantage of Norris's most glaring weakness.

 

John Brown isnt even one his best Lightweight wins. Golden Johnson and James Leija where better but you ignore them.

 

Close one

Head to head though I'd pick Norris to beat him handily.

 

Shane Mosley.