On one hand we have a man who beat Muhammad Ali, maybe unofficially twice, and gave Holmes one of his hardest fight. On the other, a man who took peak Tyson the distance, kod Douglas and went all the way with Lewis. So Norton of the first Ali fight v Tucker of the Douglas ko?
I go Kenny but with no degree of certainty. Tony was a good fighter with a good chin and some skills. Reasonable dig, too, but not enough to spook Kenny. If Ali struggled with Kenny, Tony will too. That's my premise.
Wasn’t he forty when he fought Lewis or was that just Witherspoon? I’m not under the impression that Tucker was a huge puncher and on a cursory view this looks to me like a 50-50 fight. That might change if I spend a couple hours watching specific footage
Tucker was taller but didnt have half of Ali or Holmes' heart, workrate, footwork, or stamina. He was very skilled though and wasn't an easy man to stop or outpoint so Norton definitely has his hands full even at his best. Id say Norton by close decision in a fight that's only exciting in short bursts. Nortons body punching and aggression gives him the edge in the later rounds and sways the judges over a Tucker who is just trying to survive and not to win.
I think he was around 34/5. He did well to last against Lewis and he went on to lose to Bruce Seldon on injury. It was all over for him when Herbie Hide blasted him in a couple of rounds.
Agreed. Decision bout all the way. And Norton's workrate and conditioning make Tony play the coverup game. The body punishment would have him doing his Ernie Terrell/Joe Bugner thing and making it to the finish line but not winning rounds. but I can also imagine the 3 DKP judges seeing at as draw---about like Lewis/Holyfield 1. And of course, we get a rematch.
This fight actually happened. It was called Ken Norton v Larry Middleton. At no point was Tucker ever better than Middleton. This content is protected