Why did Sugar Ray Leonard lose so BADLY to terry norris?

[LeOoze]

Alright so I know most people don't really rate Norris' win over Leonard because Leonard was shot. But what exactly made him shot? He hadn't lost in 11 years, and even if you thought Hearns won in the rematch, Leonard showed that he had plenty left in the tank.

some reasons why people say he was washed:

1. he was coming off a year lay off. that does mess up fighters a little bit, but leonard only had 1 fight in 5 years prior to fighting Hagler, and he looked good in beating him.

2. he was 34. True, Most fighters aren't at their prime at that age, but he looked good at his last fight against Duran, who was coming off his Barkley win. He didn't look shot at all. Nor did he have several losses. At most he had 2 and none were knockouts. Norris got knocked out already!

3. he was fighting at 154, was drained. This what I was thinking, i believe a fighter always loses something when they move down in weight, especially when they get older. however, leonard rarely fought higher than 154. He was 165 against Lalonde, and 160 in the Hearns rematch and Duran rubber match. So it's not like he was moving down from 175 to 154 or anything crazy.

Even though I have arguments why those 3 reasons may not have been the reason for leonard losing, I will admit that he did look like ****. did he just age overnight? what do you think

[Willie Pep 229]

Alright so I know most people don't really rate Norris' win over Leonard because Leonard was shot. But what exactly made him shot? He hadn't lost in 11 years, and even if you thought Hearns won in the rematch, Leonard showed that he had plenty left in the tank.

some reasons why people say he was washed:

1. he was coming off a year lay off. that does mess up fighters a little bit, but leonard only had 1 fight in 5 years prior to fighting Hagler, and he looked good in beating him.

2. he was 34. True, Most fighters aren't at their prime at that age, but he looked good at his last fight against Duran, who was coming off his Barkley win. He didn't look shot at all. Nor did he have several losses. At most he had 2 and none were knockouts. Norris got knocked out already!

3. he was fighting at 154, was drained. This what I was thinking, i believe a fighter always loses something when they move down in weight, especially when they get older. however, leonard rarely fought higher than 154. He was 165 against Lalonde, and 160 in the Hearns rematch and Duran rubber match. So it's not like he was moving down from 175 to 154 or anything crazy.

Even though I have arguments why those 3 reasons may not have been the reason for leonard losing, I will admit that he did look like ****. did he just age overnight? what do you think

In the tank for the long odds money?

[LeOoze]

In the tank for the long odds money?

lol. but really. If you watched Leonard vs Hearns 2, you wouldn't be thinking that he was a shot fighter at that point.

[_Rexy_]

lol. but really. If you watched Leonard vs Hearns 2, you wouldn't be thinking that he was a shot fighter at that point.

Well, I think it's pretty consensus that Hearns beat Leonard in the rematch.

While yes it was only 2 years of inactivity, SRL spent that 2 years smoking crack.

[LeOoze]

Well, I think it's pretty consensus that Hearns beat Leonard in the rematch.

While yes it was only 2 years of inactivity, SRL spent that 2 years smoking crack.

He lost too imo but he didn't look shot, that was my point.

ah that's a good point. I know SRL was a huge coke/alcohol fiend, so it finally caught up to him?

[ShoulderRoll]

Terry Norris was a very good offensive fighter and in his prime.

[Dynamite76]

He got old, and Norris was no slouch, especially in the speed department.

[Willie Pep 229]

Norris had what it took to be a champion, skill and speed, that's why he was too much for an old Leonard.

But Norris never made it to the top (ATG) because he had 'dimple in his chin.' **

1980 SRL knocks him out in four.

** Angelo Dundee's way of saying 'glass jaw.'

[them_apples]

Alright so I know most people don't really rate Norris' win over Leonard because Leonard was shot. But what exactly made him shot? He hadn't lost in 11 years, and even if you thought Hearns won in the rematch, Leonard showed that he had plenty left in the tank.

some reasons why people say he was washed:

1. he was coming off a year lay off. that does mess up fighters a little bit, but leonard only had 1 fight in 5 years prior to fighting Hagler, and he looked good in beating him.

2. he was 34. True, Most fighters aren't at their prime at that age, but he looked good at his last fight against Duran, who was coming off his Barkley win. He didn't look shot at all. Nor did he have several losses. At most he had 2 and none were knockouts. Norris got knocked out already!

3. he was fighting at 154, was drained. This what I was thinking, i believe a fighter always loses something when they move down in weight, especially when they get older. however, leonard rarely fought higher than 154. He was 165 against Lalonde, and 160 in the Hearns rematch and Duran rubber match. So it's not like he was moving down from 175 to 154 or anything crazy.

Even though I have arguments why those 3 reasons may not have been the reason for leonard losing, I will admit that he did look like ****. did he just age overnight? what do you think

*******, huge layoff and norris was good. Prime to prime its ray that gets it but lets not act like norris was a chump, his only downside was his chin basically

[Anthony342]

*******, huge layoff and norris was good. Prime to prime its ray that gets it but lets not act like norris was a chump, his only downside was his chin basically

So when did Leonard kick the habit?