I would only rank Norton the 5th or 6th best heavyweight of his era. I don't see how someone who wasn't even top 3 in their own era has any case for being close to the top 20. Given how many eras there have been it seems like such a high ranking would be reserved for guys who were far more dominant in their own times
Lol I don’t think Satterfield beats Foster. I just posed the idea that he doesn’t get blown out and has a chance. And Walcott 15-20 places above Norton is very reasonable. the best time in boxing for me is 50-75
A liar does things like makes a false claim, gets indisputably corrected and then sneaks the same claim into an offshoot thread a couple of days later. A strange guy would then double down even after getting exposed a second time and try to justify the lie with completely irrelevant points that an average 8-10yo would recognize. I'm not even a fan of Norton. He's just another boxer getting discussed on a boxing forum. I certainly wouldn't be pushing forward compulsive lies one after another to make him look better. That would be "strange". Keep doubling down and digging it deeper. I have no idea why you feel the need to bring up sexual preference in a boxing forum when nothing remotely of the sort has been discussed. It's "strange" how you even got there Oh i will. This is the numero uno of boxing forums and lies and historical revisionism don't often grow wings in here. The overall collective is far stronger than that.
Fascinating stuff and from the mouth of Eddie Futch no less. That's enough for me to reassess the Garcia loss.
You don't think a 6'3" 210+ guy with big power could go ok in a division heavy on guys still campaigning at 175 that were mostly non elite at heavyweight to be kind? His durability was ordinary but a lot of these guys didn't have much of a punch either. Bobick stopped a contender or maybe two and beat some fringe. He beat Stevenson in the AM's from memory which was actually no small feat. How do think Bobick would go against Conn, Mauriello, Bivins, Ray, Woodcock, Oma, Schott, Godoy, Maxim and Baksi? How many do you think he might be able to win? Where would you have that lot in your top 100 heavyweights?
Interesting thread. Walcott has the better wins but also many more losses. Norton has the best win and a pretty thin resume after that. Both guys came up short in really game efforts against some of the best like Louis, Marciano and Ali and Holmes. I gotta go with Walcott’s depth over Norton on all time rankings but I have both guys outside the top 20. More in the 25-40 range for me.
I can’t see Norton in the top all time 20. There has been far too many good actual champions for that. twenty would put Norton close to guys like Sonny Liston. Good contender, but he’s just not in that company at all.
