Two good heavyweights. Both better than anything around now in the top ten. Orlin Norris is a quite overlooked character. Here he's against a prime 40-1 Tony Tucker in 1991. 29-2 Norris at 5'9" is up against considerable height, weight and reach disadvantage against a modern sized heavyweight. http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=-5EZ5313jXI Norris started as a heavyweight. Won the NABF heavyweight crown defended it to Tucker before dropping down below his debut weight to win the NABF title at cruiser where defend it until he could win the WBA cruiserweight title proper. He defended that too. four times. Then after losing it to Nate Miller he took on and beat heavyweights and cruisers depending on what fight he could get. At heavyweight Norris beat champions Tucker, McCall and Greg Page. As well as decent guys at NABF level like Renaldo Snipes and Larry Alexander. He also Lost to Bert Cooper, Tyson and Vitali Klitchsko by KO but only lost on points to Tucker, Golota and Brian Neilson. At Cruiser he beat Arthur Williams, Adolfo Washington and Nate Miller.
Norris lost the fight because Tucker was busier. Orlin blocked a vast majority of the shots but didn't answer with enough of his own. This Tucker was not as good as the one who faced Tyson. He lost some of his lateral movement abilities afte a 2 plus yr. layoff after the Tyson fight. There were rumors he did a lot of Coke during those 2 yrs.
Oh come on! Tucker gave Lewis a good fight. If anything it cemented Lewis's greatness!! This Norrs fight cane before this!
I hope this is sarcasm The Tucker that faced Lewis was clearly past his prime and stood right in front of Lewis. He didn't have nearly as much slickness and mobility he had in his prime. He still had a good chin though.
So Tuckers prime was his losing effort against Tyson? How can anyone's prime be a losing effort? I rate Tucker as a good talent. I do. But he was losing against Douglas when he won that fight and Doug loo as,wound up trumping anything Tucker did beating Tyson
I really liked Orlin Norris, he was slick, a little guy taking in bigger guys with smarts and ring savey
A very good fighter. I hope historians come to appreciate the kind of fighter he was. Very good resume. Proof that a good little guy compeated extraordinarily well among modern heavyweights.
Orlin is my second favorite fighter ever behind Michael Nunn. Tremendous defense, I mean GREAT. His lack of ht and reach kept him from true HW greatness. but one of the best defensive fighters ever, WITHOUT running.
What I like about Orlin Norris is he is coming forward. 5'9" with a 70inch reach. Really nice counter presure. He's boxing of course but using pressure and being economical all at the same time. He is making a much bigger man expend himself without over exerting himself and coming forward without huge punching power or work rate. Very clever stuff. Quite incredible. Very effective.
Orlin would have had more success had he began at crusier from the start and just stayed there or maybe fought in an earlier period of smaller heavyweights. As it was he did alright. He built up a pretty good heavyweight record, beat some decent opponents, held some small regional belts and even cracked the top 10 briefly. He was short, awkard and quick.. Good defensive skills. Not much power but had plenty of accuracy and rocked some of those bigger guys who took him the distance. I saw his heavyweight fights with Greg Page and Dee Colier on ESPN. Page was shot by this point but showed up in reasonable form and Norris won nearly every round. Collier gave him some problems but was outpointed reasonably.
I think Orlin's problem at heavyweight wad that he lacked a punch. He of course was also short but if he had a punch he could have maybe gone further. But he was a good fighter.