Usyk vs. Ken Norton

Usyk beats the entire 70s HW division, the toughest fight being Frazier.

 

The Holmes fight really proved how great Norton was. He brought prime Holmes, who is generally regarded as Top 3 ATG heavweight, on the brink of defeat.He gave Larry all he could handle who had to dig deep in the 15th round to pull it off.What a great fight that was

 

A tip to all the kiddies out there, don't drink and post.

 

Funny how everyone from history is going to stop Usyk with body shots now.

I think he'll make a point of getting hit there a lot in his next fight. Let's see.

 

Toss up

 

I think it is a bit more refreshing people getting carried away as opposed to endlessly stating the 'previous era' was better myself (which is every era, really). Ring and KO used to do those "1983 vs 1993" and "1977 vs 1987" pieces, which always favoured the former...and so on. You think if Ring Magazine did a piece 100 years ago called- "1923 vs 1903" that the former would come off best- of course it wouldn't. Well my grandad once said Ernie Roderick would smash Don Curry....so maybe the sport really did peak nearly a century ago?

Retired fighters don't tend to have any more bad rounds. I was a football match Saturday and the usual 'everything was better when I was a lad' bore, was a few seats behind me, saying that a previous goalkeeper (who was American too) would have saved the opposition's goal, I said the same "retired players don't make any more mistakes"...and he wouldn't have saved it anyway, so there's that too.

 

Bring on the Bob Fitzsimmons vs Oleksandr Usyk fantasy thread I say. What's been the hold up on that one? The old solar plexus punch would sort out "Mr Feel". Unless Wyatt Earp's in charge, he'd of course rule a low blow against Fitz and in favor of "Fainting" Oleksandr Usyk.

 

Ha ha, ace.

 

Man, I get what you are saying about previous eras, "the older we get, the better we were" sort of stuff and I agree to an extent. But let's be very clear here, the heavyweight era of the 1970's was the greatest era of this sport. Unquestionably.

Foreman and Shavers wouldn't have stopped Usyk with body shots, they'd have taken his head clean off his shoulders. Frazier and Ali had a whole different skillset and would have outboxed him and done so without breaking a sweat. Others would have broken Usyk down too. He's not getting near Holmes or Lewis and prime Tyson would have been too much for him.

Now I love Usyk and think he is an absolute ornament to the sport. My posting on this site is evidence of my utmost respect for this great warrior. He is the true heavyweight champion. But he ain't in the same league at heavyweight as Ali, Norton, Foreman, Frazier or Holmes.

 

I agree, a def. low blow and it wasn't the only one landed during the fight. However, like your good self, I also wasn't on board with the OTT estimations of Usyk beating this, that and the other ATG from the past, ATGs including Foreman and Liston. Maybe I don't watch enough fights these days, but I haven't noticed any particular HWs being noticeably dedicated to good body punching. AJ is gun shy now, and before the KO against Helenius, he actually appeared a bit distraught as to how it was unfolding before he was able to pull the trigger on the right hand.

 

Hard to compare fighters from different eras, particularly as far separated as what Usyk and Norton are.

I favour Norton. Norton was underrated by many but he probably should (or could) be remembered as the only fighter ever to beat Ali twice. Big punchers like Foreman, Shavers and when he was on the way out, Cooney, were able to blast Norton out but Uysk wouldn't be able to do that. Norton in perhaps a close one.

 

Word!

Listen up you little zygotes.

Leave the drinking and posting to us high functioning adults <belch!>

 

He's not in the same league as Ken Norton has to be one of the most bizarre posts i've ever read on here. Also, as we know Ali is the top guy there, but Mildenberger gave him some trouble, especially with the jab- and a much bigger, stronger, southpaw- with a far superior jab wouldn't? Nah. Mate I used to do all this, when I was about 15 and act like everything peaked in my favourite era and no one was comparable, but, y'know I was 15.

Also, Shavers lost to most of the good fighters he fought too, so there's always that (one of the few top ones he got the better of- Joltin' Jimmy- he beat when Young was a novice and was schooled in the rematch by Jimmy according to the boxing magazines statements i've read from the time). Of course, he had tremendous power but the best guy he flattened was Kenny and even Norton's own trainer said "I never let him fight any guy who was a good puncher". So, there's that too.

So the idea that Shavers would step into a later era and KO everyone is equally laughable at claiming Norton is leagues above Usyk. He isn't. I rate Norton by the way and his own jab and pressure would see him vs Usyk being a good fight, but the Ukrainian has way more skill and better movement and would likely outpoint him.


You think comments like this weren't said in the 1970s in one of the best selling boxing magazines-

"It's a rather sad commentary on the current heavyweight scene when one considers that a fighter like Foreman, devoid of even the basic fundamentals, can attain two of pugilism's most prized possessions- and Olympic Gold Medal and the world championship".

- well if you do, you'd be wrong. Of course they were.

 

It was a low blow, the controversy been way overblown...he did milk it a bit, ala B-Hop, mind