Ken Norton v Tony Galento

Galento has a very good chance here, He was very durable, and in addition had a quick and powerful left hook. Also he was actually pretty good at parrying jabs, which was something Norton relied on to get his offense going

 

It would look like this....Norton just couldn't make the crab work against punchers.


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUWy4FtdpwI[/ame]

 

At 1:35, I love how Norton tries to block a punch by reaching out both his arms at the same time. :rofl

 

Galento had horrendous punch technique, footwork, nonexistent head movement and he was fat. Mortgage goes on Norton.

 

At the very least one thing I'd bet my mortgage on (if I had one) is Norton would definately not get Galento out of it faster than Joe Louis or Max Baer did that's for sure - other than that this ones a toughie for me - gotta go with Norton but then I not confident maybe 60/40 in favour of Norton but Galento would relish roughing up a pretty boy like Norton and Norton's legs could be buckled

 

I would favor Shavers to do that to Galento too, to be honest.

I'm not seeing what you guys are seeing in Galento.

When I see Galento, I see a very dirty fighter with next to no punch technique, poorly conditioned, average handspeed, and a very hard left hook. He rarely set punches up and he would not be as strong, fast, technically sound, or defensively sound as Norton.

I don't think it would go well for Tony.

I'm just not seeing this:

[YT]-xS1coksex4[/YT]

Beating this:

[YT]RICD8ojVQbE[/YT]

 

Ok, fine. What do you consider Galento's best performance and what do you consider Norton's? We can compare those two films.

Eitherway aside from punching hard, Galento has nothing to trouble Norton. This can't be said for Norton against Galento though. Ken has a decent jab, hard right hand and left hook, good defense, reach, defense, handspeed, footwork, and technique over Galento to beat Galento with.

 

No he wasn't - what on earth are you even blabbering about??

Galento had already been fighting for at least 6 years and had about 70 fights before the age that Norton even turned pro. Galento was a leading HW contender at the age when Norton was getting outslugged by a bloated, glass-chinned LHW Jose Garcia (which YOU claim no one is supposed to use against Norton because he was "too young" at the time ). Galento continued to fight until at least the age of 34, by which time he'd already had over 100 fights.

When you're not cherrypicking your points, you're just completely making them up.

 

Probably, this is the best Galento on film :

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4BiBTavaHg[/ame]

 

:nut

Physician, heal thyself. :deal

 

Probably because the top film shows Galento up against a guy with a rock chin and dynamite punch, both of which Norton lacked. The bottom film shows Norton jumping on a guy with a glass chin and blasting him out quickly as other fighters later did.

I would expect Norton to fare even worse than Galento did against Baer.

 

I agree with you.......

Galento wasn´t a bum.....Hell no !! A dangerous fighter !

But I just think Norton is a completely different class of fighter in terms of skills.....

Ken could get knocked out, yes....and Galento was a good puncher.
But I just can´t favor a puncher´s chance over skill superiority......

And...like I already said...I don´t see Galento´s power in the same class as the others (Foreman, Shavers and Cooney).....and he was smaller than any of these fighters......he was 220-230 sometimes only because he was fat.....

And being knocked out by Garcia is not a shame because Norton was green at the time, AND is not like Galento never lost to fighters of Garcia s level....

How many fighters worse than Norton wasn´t koed by Galento ? How many of these guys do you guys think wouldn´t be koed by prime Foreman, Shavers or even Cooney ??

I can see Galento winning one or two in a series of 8-9 fights.....due to his punching power.....that´s it !
In my opinion......

 

This is true......

but I would bet my money on Norton.....because of the reasons I stated previously....