"Terrible" Terry Norris vs PBF aka Money May @ 154 lbs / 11 Stone: Who wins?

[The Big Dunn]

Meaning I think we agree for the most part except for the word great. fair points you are making.

As for his resume, some of the better names Taylor and Blocker (both were superior at WW but avg at 154) were done and Curry had just come off getting destroyed by Nunn. He just never seemed to perform the way I expected.

I am going off memory so maybe I am being too critical and am forgetting things.

[12TRIBEsRiSe]

Norris would have his spots but loses a decision. skills pay the bills

[DreamerUSA]

Meaning I think we agree for the most part except for the word great. fair points you are making.

As for his resume, some of the better names Taylor and Blocker (both were superior at WW but avg at 154) were done and Curry had just come off getting destroyed by Nunn. He just never seemed to perform the way I expected.

I am going off memory so maybe I am being too critical and am forgetting things.

Oh his resume could be much better. Thats why he is only a HoFer imo. Curry was obviously on his way out the door. Leonard was past it, but far from shot. Taylor, Mugabi, Blocker, and Castro are all excellent wins though I agree that maybe they were'nt at their perfect weight, but again, he did'nt just edge out wins versus those guys, he made easy work of them.

Anyways always fun chatting with you.

[LoadedWraps]

There is no question he had great talent. He just never seemed to live up to that talent. For every big win there is a loss that just defies logic.

Maybe its just the word great I am having a problem with.

People get too hung up on the word great.

I would call Norris a great fighter. I would also call Floyd a great fighter.

That doesn't mean I think they are equally great, they are just both good enough to be called great by my criteria.

You can have one great fighter be vastly superior to another fighter who is also great.


James Toney is also a fighter who never lived up to his talent imo, and he is also a great fighter all things considered, imo.

[IronDanHamza]

People get too hung up on the word great.

I would call Norris a great fighter. I would also call Floyd a great fighter.

That doesn't mean I think they are equally great, they are just both good enough to be called great by my criteria.

You can have one great fighter be vastly superior to another fighter who is also great.


James Toney is also a fighter who never lived up to his talent imo, and he is also a great fighter all things considered, imo.

Nah.

Far from it actually.

[!! Shawn]

well....Leonard was many years past his best by then

Leonard was also a 3-1 odds favorite going into the fight, and only 33 years old.

Not saying he wasn't past his best, but Terry Norris won so many upset fights in emphatic fashion. He was 3-1 underdog against John Mugabi aswell.

And he was a legitimately great boxer, not just a puncher.

[!! Shawn]

I'm going to disagree with you and Dan on this. Terry while not an ATG has a damn good resume and is one of if not the best 154lber ever. It would be a toss up between him and McCallum. The guy was far from perfect, but yes he was a great fighter.

I agree its between him and McCallum as greatest 154. I might give the edge to McCallum, but Terry's athleticism would give anyone nightmares.

People are talking like there is a blueprint to outbox Terry. There isn't.

If you don't have the power to put him out cold, you are in for a LONG night.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Floyd clearly the better fighter,,, but at 154 I can see norris winning a decision.. His handspeed and two handed power and skills made terry a very hard out..

Cotto and Oscar both were able to land punches on floyd at a pretty consistent rate, if norris can do that, then I think he wins.. Much better offensive firepower than Cotto or Oscar at 154.

If norris comes out non aggressive, then I think floyd eats him just like he did canelo..

And I don't think floyd would have the power at 154 to really crack Norris' chin and stop him, unless it's a fluke thing like the victor ortiz ko.


Would be a fascinating fight to watch

[soul_survivor]

Leonard was also a 3-1 odds favorite going into the fight, and only 33 years old.

Not saying he wasn't past his best, but Terry Norris won so many upset fights in emphatic fashion. He was 3-1 underdog against John Mugabi aswell.

And he was a legitimately great boxer, not just a puncher.

I dunno where you get those odds from, if true, that's ludicrous. I could understand SRL being a slight fave at the time, considering his comeback had featured wins over Hagler, Duran, Lalonde and a draw with Hearns, without showing huge signs of wear and tear but hadn't he been out of the ring for almost 2 years by then?

Norris beat a faded fighter. Just watch Leonard in the first 3-4 rounds. He is trying to be first but can't get off at all. Imagine a prime Leonard or even 88/89 Leonard, he wouldn't been landing on norris early on.

[sunny31]

Very hard fight to call. I grew up in the Bay Area when Terry Norris was at his peak, and if you weren't around to see his peak then you will probably never get how good he was at that particular time.

I actually wasn't a fan, basically because he was so good in the early 90's, there was a point where you just couldn't see where someone was going to halt him, and I hate too much dominance in sport. He was demoralisingly good at that particular point, around 91-92, very much like Floyd during his whole career. Obviously Terry fell off, and IS NOT the fighter Floyd was overall. He was vulnerable, mentally and physically.

With all that said - I am picking Norris in a tight, high contact fight, probably a close UD. Floyd was not at his best at 154 and if he catches Norris on a good day, which is what I am assuming we are talking about here, then I give the edge to Terry, and I wouldn't be surprised if he knocked Floyd out.

Lets put it this way - if they fought in the same era, and Floyd fought and beat Terry Norris in his prime at 154, that would certainly be his best win.