Great or very good?

I would say the "great" category is held by Oscar and Shane. Higher than very good, but a step below the ATGs. I would put Trinidad in there too, but truthfully, I think of Felix as a greater fighter than DLH and Mosley and right on the border of great and ATG.

 

Yeah but it goes without saying that Jones was a bum.

 

Hatton does belong in the "very good" category, but he's a lower tier of VG. Guys like Cotto and Norris are a higher echelon of very good.

 

Norris didn't really do anything to put himself nearer Cotto than Hatton IMO.

Hatton wasn't anywhere near as talented, but he achieved a lot more and was a better finished product.

 

Roy was a glorified David Reid.

A guy named Valentino who used to post on another forum in the early 00s actually said that once.

 

Huhhhh?????

No, Ricky Hatton was not in Terry Norris' class, nor did he accomplish as much.

Both guys are known for their wins over faded guys, but Norris does have dominant wins over quality guys in their primes (like Jorge Castro), and made more title defenses over a comparable or stronger level of opp.

The best guy Hatton beat who was in his physical prime was Paulie. That speaks volumes...

This is when the Norris hate gets a bit tooooooooo much (I'm no fan myself). He was better and more accomplished than Hatton.

 

Ricky was better. He also achieved more. Norris was more talented, but he wasn't better. Ricky amounted to more because he was tougher and had better intangibles. It's why he wasn't knocked out in his prime by an old man, half his size.

The Kostya Tsyzu Hatton beat was clearly better than anybody Norris' beat by the time Norris beat them. Furthermore, you say it like a win over a prime Paulie isn't better than any wins Norris has over prime fighters. How is a habitual loser like Castro a better win than Malignaggi?

Norris, if anything, gets overrated. He wasn't in Cotto's league, and he wasn't as good as Hatton.

 

A washed up Ray Leonard is better than a washed up Tszyu. Tszyu may have been LESS SO washed up, but given the astronomical gap between Leonard and Tszyu, I would say Leonard was still better. A mediocre fighter would have lost to Leonard that night. Norris dominated him because Norris was elite level.

I know you like him and all, but Ricky Hatton wasn't all that good.

Norris, like any fighter, can become both overrated and underrated. To even put in a conversation with Hatton is underrating him.

 

Leonard looked flat and poor. He was worse than Tzysu by that point, I can tell by just using my eyes. No mediocre fighter was beating Tzysu that night either. The only other junior welter in the world who was beating Tzysu that night was Miguel Cotto.

Whether I like Ricky or not - as much as I joke, he isn't even close to one of my favourite fighters, even fighters from Manchester - he was better than Norrs.

I'm far more impressed by beating somebody, while old, who was still elite than I am beating a slew of old, smaller fighters who were nowhere near elite. The one time Norris misjudged how shot somebody was they knocked him the fuck out. The only people who beat a prime Hatton were two of the best fighters of all time.

Norris fits firmly in the 'good' category. He was incredibly talented, but extremely flaky.

 

That guy was an angry weirdo

 

Disappeared one day and was never heard from again. I wonder if he offed himself because he was so miserable.

 

I disagree with you on DLH and Trinidad. I don't see Trinidad as a level higher than DLH. Imo they are dead even. You might be swayed by your east coast connection/nostalgia with Tito. As someone that probably watched his fights live at MSG I can see why you might feel that way. But make no mistake most media at that time agreed that Oscar gave Trinidad a Boxing lesson for 3/4 of the fight. And what separates them for me is how well Dlh did against Floyd. A past his prime Oscar at that. And Floyd is better than any fighter Trinidad beat by leaps and bounds. Some people have even suggested DLH beat Floyd(a small minority)

 

Anyone who thinks Oscar beat Floyd or even got a draw is either incredibly biased or can't score a fight.

I detest both of them, but Floyd won quite clearly. A dull, uninspiring fight, but while Oscar had his moments, he got outboxed.

What a flawed reason for ranking Oscar over Tito - for winning 4 rounds off Floyd...

Let's rank Castillo, Maidana, Judah, and Victor Sosa over Trinidad too.

And "East Coast Bias?" LOL. Stop. Just stop.

Trinidad isn't even a New York Rican. He's an Island Rican. The TF are you taking about?

 

Tito was more consistent than Oscar against their common opponents, had a longer reign at 147 lbs, and a more impressive run at 154 than Oscar did. He even looked better at 160 than Oscar ever did, and regardless of what people think about the decision, Tito has a win over Oscar. All of that translates into a legitimate argument over Tito being greater than Oscar.

Norris was a better fighter than Hatton. Ricky’s signature wins are over a faded Tszyu and Paulie Malignaggi. Norris win in the rematch over Simon Brown and his win over Leonard is better. Hatton was barely above European level.

 

This is ridiculous. Hatton was well above European level.

 

I don't know who was better between Norris and Hatton but Norris was way more exciting. A very fast and good combination puncher. The fact that he was chinny added to the excitement of his fights. Hatton was effective but he could be such an eyesore with his wrestling tactics. Personnally, I prefer Norris, not because he was definitely better but simply because he offered a way more compelling kind of boxing. None of them qualifies as great.

 

Terry Norris was considered a great on boxing message boards in late 90s/early 00s. Probably because we are all younger then, and didn't know any better.

I think it was in the last 10-15 years or so that his status among hardcores declined... and declined big time.

Although, in fairness, Cdogg was ALWAYS low on him.

 

I’m neutral on the Norris/Hatton debate, but I agree with you about how good Leonard and Tszyu were in those losses.

Leonard of course was better and greater than Tszyu, that’s a given. But he just looked plain bad against Norris, and not only because Norris’s talent.

Leonard hadn’t really looked too good in awhile, really. He had that fight with a bigger but drained Lalonde, which he didn’t look all that great except when he turned back the clock at the end to show his amazing finishing skills. He got a gift draw against a supposedly shopworn Hearns, and won a snoozefest against Duran. Then he looked even worse against Norris.

Tszyu had been inactive for almost 2 years, and then looked great against Mitchell. People probably got a little overexcited after the Mitchell win (he was #3 p4p) and didn’t think about his age and inactivity catching up with him against Hatton, but I still thought he had a pretty good amount left against Hatton. Definitely more than 91’ SRL.

 

Leonard still had decent speed in the Norris fight. Check out the early rounds.

91 Leonard would still beat a Keith Thurman or a Shawn Porter.

Norris beat him down MAINLY because Leonard was a shell of the 80s, but also because Norris was extremely good.

Make no mistake in what im trying to say though, cause 81 Leonard would have obliterated Norris.

I also think prime Tszyu would have stopped Hatton, but that's a lot more debatable.

 

I didnt see that statement about Hatton barely above Euro level. Yeah, that isn't accurate.

Hatton is a top 20 all time junior welterweight. Far far from Pryor, Chavez, Cervantes, Locche level, but somewhere in the top 20.

That puts him overwhelmingly above Euro level.

 

I have to say I disagree on this one mate. 91 Leonard was BAD, in the bad way. I say this as someone who considers SRL's resume and legacy to be the absolute creme de la creme. Obviously Thurman and Porter aren't even in the same universe as a Leonard even close to his best, but the guy who fought Norris? I dunno man.

 

A non-boxing skill having hack like Keith Thurman would only beat the Camacho Leonard imo.

 

I probably need to watch again, and yeah the Camacho Leonard was next-level awful, but the Norris-Leonard was really, really bad. It could have been it was just Norris's night (and I've always had a lot of respect for Norris's talent) but Leonard could have been outhustled that night by a guy like Thurman imo, even though Thurman is nowhere even close to the guy talent-wise.

 

I watched Norris-Leonard as early as a month ago.

Ray looked okay up until Norris caught him with a hook at the end of the 2nd. Up until then he was doing pretty decently.

But note, he looked okay by NORMAL fighter standards. He only looked shot by Ray Leonard standards, if that makes sense.

Kinda similar to how the Jones of the Calzaghe fight would still be able to beat "good" fighters, but no longer able to beat an elite like Calz.

 

If he looked okay by normal standards for less than two rounds, then he didn't look good.

He was in no way as good as the Tsyzu Hatton beat.

 

He still showed more intangibles, for what it's worth.

 

srl moved down in weight for the norris fight (cherry-picking). and consequently, looked even shittier for his age.

 

You would have a better idea, having watched the fight more recently, but out of curiosity who is the best fighter you would pick the Norris version of Leonard over? Not a piss take by the way or anything, genuinely curious as I doubt I'll watch that fight again.

 

I will say this, I think Norris and Calzaghe are legit the worst opponents to face, style-wise, for a shot formerly-great fighter.