Joseph Parker vs prime Ken Norton

Norton by decision. Parker is not the kind of fighter that would threaten Norton too much but he would win some rounds.

 

Norton by competitive decision, Parker is no joke especially with Lee in his corner but I think Norton would be too crafty for him.

 

Norton beats Parker who won't trouble Norton with his punches. But it wouldn't be one-sided

 

I can see Parker going all 12 rounds but Norton wins more rounds but Parker makes a good impression.

 

Parker has average power and is a tactical boxer that's the kind of opponent who Norton can thrive against I think Norton by decision.

 

Norton was a very good boxer, strong accurate puncher. His only weakness his chin, but Parker hasnt got the power to stop him.

Norton wins a hard fought decision.

 

Parker all the way - The modern fighter always wins. Norton was a big, strong cruiser, Parker a big strong superheavyweight.

 

Norton was 6'3 220 pounds he was not a Cruiserweight by any stretch of the imagination.

 

Agree w/the essence of your comment although Norton would be a small HW today... and chinny.
Here's the rub. If Ali struggled with an opponent, then that fighter has to be some near ATG. Many astute boxing pundits don't think Ali ever truly defeated Norton. Ali-Norton II could easily been a draw, and III was a robbery. Foreman, Shavers, and Cooney* obliterated Norton quickly.
* And don't give that crap about Norton being so old vs. Gerry. He was 37 and looked in superb condition. Many of the current top HWs are mid 30s and OLDER !

Norton would fare poorly vs. top modern HWs. Lewis, both K bros, and many other top HWs from 2010s & 20s beat or massacre Ken. Parker has better punch resistance, better fluid movement than Norton, and a naturally bigger man. Norton was hammering a past it Quarry on his was to a TKO, but never dropped Jerry. His power is overrated, especially vs. bigger, stronger current HWs. Ken is hardly heavier handed than Joe, maybe just a bit.
Joe with a comfy decision.

Due to the "golden age" and Ali bias I expected Norton to be ahead but as I'm typing this it's 15:3 for Norton after I voted. Ridiculous

 

Norton kills him

 

So you think Parker beats Usyk too?

 

Norton height was 6'2½'', and weighed 205/210 for the two first Ali fights in the early 1970's. That was in his prime. Today he would (with ease) make cruiserweight. If you want confirmation for his height I shall find it.

 

It is ridiculous! We all love the 1970's golden era, but nostalgia and emotions make a lot of fans blinded by sympathy. I can understand that, but let's be realistic. Most of them would fight in the cruiser division today. It is true that Ruíz is short, it's true Holy could compete with bigger men and all that. But, in general, in 9 out of 10 the good big man beat the good little man. In the case of Norton vs. Parker, you said it, Norton would just lack chin, heart, bulk and strength. If I may be a bit provocative, I think a prime Usyk would have a very, very good chance of outpointing an in prime Ali. Ali, while in his prime, had trouble with small Mildenberger, who lost to a lot of ranked contenders.

 

No, I don't. But you have to look at styles. Norton was a completely different fighter than Usyk.