Ken Norton vs Max Baer

To be honest with you, Baer made a career out of destroying men who were better boxes than him, from a technical standpoint.

Also just because a fighter is not technically sound, it doesn't mean that they lack ring IQ.

 

Which of them were the size of Ken Norton?

Yes, let's remember Baer's tremendous ring IQ:

This content is protected

Meanwhile here's Norton against a very game Quarry:

This content is protected

I think its very clear who is the better technician and ring general.

 

Primo Carnera perhaps?

I am not disputing that Norton is the better technician and ring general, I just don't think that it woudl help him very much.

 

The guy that broke his ankle and who is nowhere near Norton in ability? OK.

Watch the Braddock fight again.

 

There are many charges that can be laid at Max Baer's door, but feasting on smaller opposition is not one of them.

He chopped down the biggest heavyweight champion of them all.

It is worth noting that Carnera was not only bigger than Baer, he was also a better technician as well.

You might have given me a spoiler alert.

The crucial difference between Norton and Braddock, is that for all his other failings, Braddock had an outstanding chin.

 

I beg to differ. Fat Galento gave Baer all he could handle in a stinker of a fight.

 

1) Carnera screwed his ankle up early
2) Carnera may have been better than Baer technically but nobody is going to mistake Carnera for Norton

The crucial equivalence is that Braddock landed on Baer at will who demonstrated none of this supposed ring IQ and plodded after Braddock throwing little and eating much.

 

well trolled

I'm done

 

If you are going to play the ankle card for Carnera, then you have to factor in Baer's hand injuries, sustained in the Braddock fight.

I get it that Baer didn't cover himself during the Braddock fight, but Braddock could take a punch a lot better than Norton could.

 

Bauer was in the twilight of his career at this point, and he beat the current #1 Ring contender very decisively.

That woudl be the other way to look at that fight.

 

Not wishing to take anything away from Braddock's story but upon what do you base this assertion?