Ken Norton verus Joe Louis' opposition...

You are more generous than the boxing community, which is probably a really good thing.

I've heard Riddick Bowe called a tub of goo by some noted trainers. Professionals just don't have tolerance for guys who show up out of shape, and Tony notoriously struggled with this, regardless of how formidable the guy he was fighting was. ( To dispute the, "he'd be up for Norton!" argument)

I just don't see a guy who was consistently overweight and undertrained being favored over a guy he was always in incredible shape, and was bigger and better skilled. He also, while a large puncher, isn't in Foreman or Shavers' league.

 

Max Baer stops him, I like Schmeling also and many of the others could take him out, Galento had a shot,Walcott beats him and I like Charles against him...Norton had the style to give Ali fits but lost to every puncher that he faced and Garcia was 188lbs when he KO'd Norton...Foreman,Cooney,Shavers,Garcia and even Scott Ledoux looked like a puncher vs Ken had him down 2X in there draw

Billy Conn, Godoy, Farr, were all good fighters with good chins, they could also possibly beat Ken....Norton arguably lost to Young as well...I would bet against him vs many of Louis's opponents

 

Two very good points there.

There seems to be a lot of revisionism on Norton in this thread.

 

:good

 

This


Basically, I think Conn, Baer and Walcott, and a prime Schmelling are the only ones with a decent chance (50-50 or close) to defeat Kenny Boy

 

Ridiculous. Plus he froze up agianst heavy punchers, so Baer or Abe Simon would be problem by time fight starts. Uzcudum beat Harry Wills, gave Louis tough fight, i would go with him over Norton, plus Shmeling. Walcott and Charles would both beat him. Norton would beat about half, lose to most of rest.

 

Norton froze up against Cooney too, it was known and talked about back when he fought about him doing that. He was also ko'd in California on way up, about time he was entering top 10, agianst Latin heavy who was good puncher, some say that did something to him mentally.
Walcott fought alot of times in era when a loss was not such a big deal since: you were matched tough more often; and you got rematches easy. Walcott also fought on and off, sometimes took bouts on short notice. He got better after 1946, and despite any losses, he gave Louis tough time, ko'd Charles, gave Marciano tough fight, and his style was tough to beat, a boxer with hard punch. Very hard punch.

 

You now, I am not putting Norton down by saying he was not Joe Louis, cause who was? Not Norton.

 

Who really knows how big a puncher these guys from way back when were. You might've heard the story Ron Lipton told about a 60's something diabetes stricken Galento folding a heavy bag in half with a left hook, saying it was the hardest shot he'd ever seen and he'd seen a prime Liston hit the bag. You've also got to consider how he threw his punches, he got in a very low crouch waited for his opponent to hit him then using his huge legs proppelled himself forward while throwing a left hook, thats 230lbs or so behind every punch. Another thing to take into account is that Norton wasn't a very big puncher and it's very unlikely that Norton would be able to stop Galento and i just don't see Norton in there for 10, 12, 15 rounds without getting seriously tagged. Of course then there's Galento's low blows, elbowing, gouging, rabbit punches etc.

Since were talking about Louis' opposition for his title defenses i'd favour Norton over everbody except Galento, Nova, Walcott and Charles.

 

I don't have much tolerance for out of shape guys either. But the standards of these days are actually lower than in Galento's day. Heavyweights of the last 30 years have routinely carried a bit of flab like Tony did.
Ray Mercer, and our favourite Ruslan Chagaev, in some of their best fights had the same waist line as Galento.

During 1937 - 1940, his contender years, the only times I think Galento was badly out of shape for formidable guys was the two fights with the Baer brothers. This was after Joe Jacobs, his manager, had suddenly died and Galento went off the rails.

Let's just take the Galento of the Louis fight, that's the intention of this thread.
233 pounds, and he didn't look way out of shape in the weigh in picture standing next to lean mean Louis.

But Galento did beat "body beautiful" and skillful guys. Lou Nova was highly rated, had just beat Max Baer, and Galento had him down several times early in the fight and then brutalized him for 14 rounds.
Joe Louis hit the deck with a shot from Galento that really didn't have as much on it as Tony could have.

And, yes, I do think Galento was a major league hitter. He had no finesse, but he had major power. When he landed clean, he was knocking guys flying.

just my take. Not saying he was a great fighter. Many boxers could, and did, outbox him.
But he's 100% a serious danger man to Norton.

 

I would have thought that the majority here would hold that view. Am I wrong?

 

Norton had one of the best builds in boxing but it shows you one thing there are no weights to build up the chin...Ken was like a deer in the headlights when he faced a puncher ....I must say he gave Ali and Holmes great battles but that was a matter of styles...Again Garcia was 188lbs when he KO'd Ken

I think Louis and many of his opponents are underrated on this site. I don't think Ken Norton's chin holds up in the Joe Louis era and I would bet the house it would not hold vs the Brown Bomber

 

I agree.

Thinking about what's been said already on Norton v Galento, it reminds me of when Frank Bruno challenged Tim Witherspoon.
The British press made a big thing out of Witherspoon's flabby overweight 234 pound body compared to Bruno's magnificent god-like physique. The contrast was stark and contributed to a lot of sentimental betting and hopeful predictions in favour of an Bruno win.
Witherspoon ended up outlasting Bruno in a gruelling heavy-hitting tussle.

This content is protected

Of course, I'm not saying Galento was to Norton what Witherspoon was to Bruno ... I agree that Norton was much the better boxer, and has a distinct height and reach advantage.
But stylistically Galento's the kind of fighter who would make Norton do what he doesn't like to do .... back up.
And Galento had REAL POWER to follow up with, he wasn't just a brawler with an average punch. He had a brutal punch.
And as you point out, Norton's chin was never mistaken for granite.

Godoy, Buddy Baer, Nova, Walcott and Schmeling would be the challengers I'd make 50-50 or better against Norton.
I wouldn't write off Tommy Farr or Tami Mauriello either.