Terry Norris " Mayweather with all that slapping and running "

[bradlee180]

Yes Floyd had no chance against a guy koed by Simon Brown , or outpointed by Derrick Kelly,

What are you on about, Simon Brown was a fantastic fighter!
Damn hard head, hard punch, stamina.
Two years before the Norris fight, Brown rated as the best welter in the world, but he was a BIG strong physical welter unlike Floyd, Brown reduced from 175 lbs to make 147.
When he lost the Welter title to McGirt, Brown beginning to have trouble making 147 was a bit of a factor there. Later, at 154 and even 160, Brown was quite destructive after the McGirt loss.

And Derrick Kelly, for $#!t's sake, bringing up early losses when a guy's a new 1 year pro?
In that era, plenty of guys had a couple of early losses. Each fight was supposed to be a test for a young prospect, to develop them, they weren't protected the way many are nowadays.

[Beanflicker]

In that era, plenty of guys had a couple of early losses. Each fight was supposed to be a test for a young prospect, to develop them, they weren't protected the way many are nowadays.

I just want to clarify as to whether or not you're suggesting that promoters only started protecting guys after the early 90s?

[bradlee180]

I just want to clarify as to whether or not you're suggesting that promoters only started protecting guys after the early 90s?

There have ALWAYS been protected fighters, but not to the extent that it's done now.
The result is some undeveloped fighters fighting for titles.
When the new Champ finally gets in deep against a serious opponent, they don't have the answers, they don't know how to adjust, they don't have the tools in their toolkit. That stuff used to be worked out while a guy was developing. It's why old, multi-dimensional dudes who came up the old way like Hopkins and Juan Manuel Marquez can outslick and out-think some of these current young, prime guys even though Hopkins and Marquez are way past their physical best...

[Ron Swanson]

There have ALWAYS been protected fighters, but not to the extent that it's done now.
The result is some undeveloped fighters fighting for titles.
When the new Champ finally gets in deep against a serious opponent, they don't have the answers, they don't know how to adjust, they don't have the tools in their toolkit. That stuff used to be worked out while a guy was developing. It's why old, multi-dimensional dudes who came up the old way like Hopkins and Juan Manuel Marquez can outslick and out-think some of these current young, prime guys even though Hopkins and Marquez are way past their physical best...[/QUOTE]

If your theory were true all the old timers could still compete, not just Marquez and Hopkins. Hopkins and Marquez are smarter through experience but the are exceptions because they are exceptional.

To add further your point make no sense when discussing Floyd in the protected age, he was a champ in less than two years. He wasn't slow played, he was thrown into the fire.

[Ron Swanson]

People don't remember Norris as he was, they remember him as they saw him.

He looked like he had great power but he only had a 55% KO rate.

He looked impossible to deal with but people beat him regularly before his title days, during his title days and after his title days.

He looks like a big guy but he only had a 68" reach.


He has a shot against most anyone ever but he could also lose to many people throughout 154s history

[FinitoElDinamita]

People don't remember Norris as he was, they remember him as they saw him.

He looked like he had great power but he only had a 55% KO rate.

He looked impossible to deal with but people beat him regularly before his title days, during his title days and after his title days.

He looks like a big guy but he only had a 68" reach.


He has a shot against most anyone ever but he could also lose to many people throughout 154s history

KO percentages are not always an indicator of one's punching power..

Kendall Holt and Lamont Peterson have the exact same KO percentage but do u really believe these guys have equal punching power? One can argue that holt is one of the hardest punchers at 140 as he has true one punch knockout power in both hands..

There are many factors to take into account when gauging someones power.. level of opposition, style of opponents they faced, or in holt's case for instance, he was plagued by shoulder problems for the longest time so he couldnt throw punches with full extension..

TerryNorris was a thunderous puncher plain and simple.

[Ron Swanson]

KO percentages are not always an indicator of one's punching power..

Kendall Holt and Lamont Peterson have the exact same KO percentage but do u really believe these guys have equal punching power? One can argue that holt is one of the hardest punchers at 140 as he has true one punch knockout power in both hands..

There are many factors to take into account when gauging someones power.. level of opposition, style of opponents they faced, or in holt's case for instance, he was plagued by shoulder problems for the longest time so he couldnt throw punches with full extension..

TerryNorris was a thunderous puncher plain and simple.[/QUOTE]

Excuses. Truth is punching power is defined by your ability to deliver it. Only 55% of men fell.
I'm a Norris fan, always have been but I'm not going to pretend he was getting fools out of there with his power.

[Ron Swanson]

I'd also like to point out that judging a persons power by KOs/wins is cheating the truth to fit your needs.

Your power has the opportunity to effect your wins and your losses. All the times your power didn't have an effect should count just like all the times it did have an effect.

I mean if you're going to pick and choose why not just look at the KO fights? 31 times he got the KO 100% of the time.