Thoughts on Ken Norton?

Have you seen the Duane Bobick fight?

 

yes this happens in boxing

 

On this day, I don't know where to rank Norton all time. I've agreed, with other family members, to adopt the rankings we come up with as a family. And that's still not settled. I can say that, during his career, IMHO, Kenny was not as good as (alphabetical): Ali, Foreman, Frazier, and Holmes. This says a lot for Ali and Holmes, because Ken Norton's style is poison for both of them. Although Kenny did lose to Shavers and Cooney, late in his career, I can't imagine rating him lower than them on any all time list. I think, in Kenny's case, the Holmes fight was the last really good effort he had left in him. Ken was a warrior. No doubt about that. In the right era he probably would have been Lineal Champion.

 

A great fighter who froze when hit flush by the most powerful heavyweights ever. Cooney, Shavers, Foreman...they're top 5 greatest punchers in practically anyone's book. No shame there.

I have him at #20.

 

There's no other fighter I can think of with a wider gap between the quality of fighters he could beat and lose to. By that I mean I think he beats some atg fighters and loses to some pretty average ones and not just by fluke. That makes him difficult to assess.

 

If Ken Norton would have clearly lost the first fight against Muhammad Ali on March 31 1973, he would have been considered as just another opponent for Muhammad Ali. As talented as Norton was, he was at the right place, at the right time. But he did have a weakness against heavy punchers in his prime years against prime opponents. Ali was not a puncher.

 

To be fair he was pretty much shot for Shavers and Cooney. I'd favor him over both prime for prime.

 

I wouldn't be surprised. I might be totally wrong, but if I remember correctly Garcia, though known for his punch, was probably a better boxer than either Earnie or Gerry.

 

his tactics with Shavers are risk but also some logic. he attempts to go close range stop Shavers loopy big punch but it open to Shavers uppercut. Shavers did very good punching on this fight more accuracy than the usual. Norton was already in old side & not sharp to get off punches. Five years on younger side his tactical could have reversed the successes in the fight. Is possible with Shavers could go one way or other way

with Cooney he was simple "shot' complete. Now 37 almost 38 & had come off out off retirements for this fight. With Cooney with younger Norton certainly expectations of Norton win! Norton was dead man corpse stiff before bell rang for round 1 already. when Norton took Ali in 1973 it's not serious to guess Cooney can knock him. Cooney only knock old name "shell" or 'shadow " . "ghost ' actual. complete shot

 

Lost with Garcia is not really in the question. we can answer Norton not yet the contender level & it is questions how good could Garcia be if he fight this way or keep in track or get the right match for rest of career? this is boxing.

 

Norton's top 20 all time , he did beat Muhammed Ali twice ,I don't care what the judges say I saw it. A younger Norton would have gotten a win over Holmes. He gives a lot of boxers serious trouble and could beat many who are judged to be above him.

 

I may be pretty young but I gotta say that a lot of you guys rate people on Ali in ways that's not making any sense to me because Ali wasn't really that hard to beat as you all make out.

 

yeh and even tyson beat holmes, so...

 

He won the WBC title without a fight (as did Lenox Lewis, but Lenox Lewis fully justified his).
Very good Boxer, with an unusual fighting style.
He defeated Alija, which few can boast of
He didn't have a chance against the superior Foreman, as well as Frazier, who is better than Norton.
He played a very important role in the heavyweight category of the 70s, and added his own spice to it.
Respect and praise from me; all in all.
Without Norton the 70s would be poorer.

 

Cooney is not anywhere near the top 5 greatest punchers.