BoxRec

Dart340 wrote:I forgot Hearns was the ultimate destroyer at 147lbs and not that he flailed around with Randy Shields for 12 rounds and looked less than imposing against no-hopers Luis Primera and Pablo Baez, so of course he'd automatically do a Cuevas on lightning quick, sharp punching, technically sound, non-weight drained Donald Curry. Thanks for straightening that out so simply for me.

i always find it funny
we only throw in great performances to make our case

we hardly ever look at the over all avg of their peak

Awesome match up.

That Curry would have been tough for anyone in history, including Hearns. He was brilliant. Could go either way, but I lean toward Curry catching him and stopping him. He was a very, very good finisher.

Curry left everything he had in the amateurs. He had over 400 wins and only 4 losses. Think about that for a second. Of all the boxers that got screwed by the 1980 olympic boycott, it was Curry that got screwed the worst. Perhaps Bernard Taylor would have been a distant second.

I have the same fears with GGG and his amateur wear and tear and I had the same fears for Kostya Tzyu as well. Kostya was a top ten most feared amateur fighter of all time. People spoke of "the Russian" in quiet tones when talking about him. He was awesome. But had a short lived, albeit, hall of fame career but should have been more. Too much wear and tear.

Curry might start favourite against every welter champ since he was dethroned. I’d back him against Whittaker, Mosely, Trinidad, De La Hoya, Mayweather…

But Hearns was too good for him, I think. Curry couldn’t close the distance as quickly as Leonard and he generally punches when set rather than on the way in. Stamina is the only way I see Hearns losing…if he were to unravel late in the fight. But I don’t expect that to happen.

Hearns wins by stoppage after 8 rounds or if Curry is more cautious it goes the distance.

Ezzard wrote:Curry might start favourite against every welter champ since he was dethroned. I’d back him against Whittaker, Mosely, Trinidad, De La Hoya, Mayweather…

But Hearns was too good for him, I think. Curry couldn’t close the distance as quickly as Leonard and he generally punches when set rather than on the way in. Stamina is the only way I see Hearns losing…if he were to unravel late in the fight. But I don’t expect that to happen.

Hearns wins by stoppage after 8 rounds or if Curry is more cautious it goes the distance.

I gotta agree with you on this one. Curry's chin, to me, was softer than Hearns IMO. But this fight has a look of a great match. Especially, if they would have fought in 1984 or 1985 at super welterweight. At 154lbs, Hearns would have knocked Curry out much faster. At 147lbs, with both at their peak, Curry has a better chance. He is not Pipino Cuevas and he was truly way better than Randy Shields. It could be a toss up at 147lbs. Curry was a very good fighter, with the potential of being an all-time great.

The Donald Curry that zapped McCrory was on par with the Hearns that crushed Cuevas.

Hearns does get too much credit for being an awesome destroyer and folks get excited and take his best performances as the average and the norm. Until you actually watch his 147lb defenses and you see the other side.

I think I would take the killer Curry who dispatched McCrory with absolute disdain and viciousness over the SRL version of Hearns.

Seamus wrote:While he was a very skilled fighter in his prime, Donald Curry never once showed the mental or physical toughness to pull off a scenario like Leonard's rallying to stop Hearns.

Hell he freaked out when honeyghan cut him
Agree curry possibly had the skills to push hearns hard over points at 147 perhaps barder than benitez did and its an intangible he he sure had power to hurt tommy curry was an unreal talent in his prime but hearns was a freak if nature

Don't think Curry could have gotten through Hearn's left jab and boom, the right would follow.