Curry gave McCallum some difficulties despite being stopped by that beautiful left hook, would he have given Tommy any problems or would he be dealt with much easier? Also how would Norris have done vs this version of Curry or Hearns at 154? You guys are really intimdating!
Hearns would destroy any version of Curry, and I'm high on Curry. Curry had a terrible habit of pulling straight back from punches, and Tommy would have exploited that very quickly. Curry was also used to have a quickness edge over his opponents, but that wouldn't be the case here. I just see Hearns bombing out Curry inside of 4. Even the prime Curry. Donald was an excellent fighter - dare I say even a great fighter in his brief prime - but he woulda been overmatched by Hearns and Leonard.
I'm starting to wonder myself. These kind of threads are terrible in my opinion. Why can't the classic forum be about discussing the greatness of these former fighters instead of creating a thread about who would "finish" a former great quicker. Seems disrespectful and shitty. The best thing about boxing is that it is the ultimate prove it sport. Hypothetical opinions by dudes that clearly never fought but think reading a few magazines makes then an expert sticks in my craw. Last I read Curry is not very well off like a lot of other great warriors. He deserves better than this especially when he proved more than enough as fighter.
The highlight of Markants day is to antagonize then pretend either it was an accident or he was ignorant of the rules.
Sorry, I just wanted to compare McCallum to Hearns at light middle and felt Curry landed some good shots on Mike and I don`t know what the judges score cards were saying up to Curry being KO`d.
Fair enough, but I didn`t mention that one of the kids I sparred with was a relative to a Irish kid that kicked the **** out of me the year before.
