How would Ken Norton fair if he was around today ?

The man who broke Alis jaw - so what! Ali was a human, his bones could break.... Merely saying he was good because he broke Alis Jaw is bull****.

 

Norton was old and past it vs Cooney. I think Norton would do well today, and rate as a top 5 guy who would likely win an alphabet title or two before he retires. IMO, Norton defeats Valuev easy.

 

The only fighters who have a shot at beating Norton today are Wlad, Vitali and Haye. The rest are nowhere near good enough and would get a drubbing.

He can beat all 3, if you can arguably beat Ali 3 times, Holmes then beating the Klits in tough close fights is possibly. People point to Norton's losses to Shavers and Foreman, but they were brutal punches and Norton was old against Shavers. Vitali simply doesn't have the power of those 2 men and is far more similar to Ali and Holmes, but not as good as either. I think Norton makes Vitali pay for fighting with his hands down, backs him up and scores many clean well timed shots. Wlad and Haye may have the power to smoke Norton, although they don't have the power or offense of a Shavers or Foreman. If they don't Norton would take Haye out late and give Wlad a close hard fight or even stop him down the stretch

Norton is seriously underrated based on a few losses, and some past prime losses

 

No, but they have the punching power to crack Norton's chin, along with the boxing skills and physical attributes to make those punches land. I think Vitali beats him early, while Wlad stops him a tad later. Norton would certainly be a top force in today's weak heavyweight picture, but he would not dominate the whole division in my eyes. He would probably sit right around #3, while holding one of the obscure alpha titles.

 

Vitali would have beaten Norton. I agree on that one, for sure.

 

Vitali isn't a puncher, certainly not in the realm of Shavers/Foreman. Wlad may have near that power but doesn't throw that many aggressive power shots.

Wlad himself has a worse chin than Norton and hes crumbled under worse pressure fighters than Norton

 

All of the above is true, but for some reason I can't help but imagine Norton being overwhelmed by the Klitschko's size and punching ability. I realize that we're not talking about George Foreman here, but from both a physical and stylistic perspective, these seem like bad matches for Norton.

 

Before you make statements like "i'm not sure if you understand boxing at all", answer these questions:

-How much do Vitali and Ali have in common, style wise?
-How well did Norton do against guys with knockout percentages over 70%, or pressure fighters in general that weren't shot?

 

1. Both used a hands down leaning back defense, used their height and both were arm punchers. Vitali is far slower, less skilled, worse footwork but taller
2. You do realise Ali had a KO percentage over 80% when he faced Norton? Bobick had an 80% KO ratio. KO percentages mean jack when Vitali's only faced 6ranked opponents (if that).

 

Yeah, Norton himself said that he punished Quarry on purpose for him being racist.

How was Norton mislead into believing Quarry was a racist?

 

Vitali has stopped every defeated opponent but one, Ali has far from. Vitali often presses forward and throws 70 punches a round. Ali doesn't apply much pressure in most fights, but anticipates the opponents' move. All of these Ali-properties play into Norton's hands, while all of Vitali's are poison for him.

As for Ali's KO percentage, i think it's closer to 75%, but most of those came in the 60's where he relied on sick speed and simply outclassing most of his opposition rather than being a big hitter. Bobick could punch but he never amounted to much in the pro's (contrary to the amateurs), plus he never landed anything on Norton. Vitali won't choke like that, has an iron chin and will land on Norton.


And while Klitschko only faced 6 ranked opponents, everyone one that he beat, he beat down by TKO. That is pretty rare, as well as knocking out all of your "tomato can" opposition except for one.... even Foreman didn't do that and he faced worse cans. And i'm not saying Klitschko is a bigger puncher than Foreman, but just putting things into perspective.

Basically it comes down to this:
-Norton can't handle pressure fighters (even Futch attested to this when he trained him)
-Norton only beat one big puncher (Bobick), who never landed on him nor ever accounted to much as a professional boxer
-Vitali wins almost all his fights by TKO and is incredibly heavy handed
-Norton has no puncher's chance, nor will be able to pull a Bobick

 

You guys need to watch this 'KO percentage' when prestenting your cases. If one fighter has a higher knockout percentage than the one he's being compared to, it doesn't mean he's a harder puncher. In most cases, perhaps, but not all the time. Styles have a lot to do with this, quality of opponents, also speed as well, depending on the fighters power of course. Ali was an average puncher who happened to be very fast and accurate with his shots. He could throw his shots through the eye of a needle.

Holmes has the highest number of consecutive heavyweight defenses ending inside the distance. 8, I think. Does that mean he was harder puncher than Foreman or Louis? Course not.

 

I agree with this, except that I would make Norton the underdog in all 3 fights, although I might be stretching it with David Haye. Norton always froze against big punchers and I think all 3 will stop Norton. IMO, Vitali qualifies as a big puncher, regardless of how hard his single shot power actually is.

That's in no way to denigrate Kenny Norton, who was an excellent fighter. It's just that the styles of all 3, for slightly different reasons, are not good for him. Wlad will spear him on the end of the jab and knock him out, Vitali will wear him down and stop him mid rounds and Haye probably will stop him early too, although Norton can definitely stop Haye if he lands. He can stop Wlad too I think but he'll freeze against all 3 I'm sure.

 

ALi fought about 15ranked opponents before Norton and had a 80% stoppage ratio, Vitali 6 (losing 2), Vitali is effectively a novice, Vitali's ranked fighters:

Sanders- 2round fighter
Danny Williams - 60lbs overweight, coming off a loss to Mike Sprott
Kirk Johnson - 60lbs overweight
Sam Peter - his best win, Peter is pretty shocking

All of these fighters are low top10 types, they wouldn;t make top10 in many eras, a top class HW should put a beating on them.

Vitali's KO percentage means little because hes had a stage managed career, with hand picked tomato cans and when hes come up against his biggest challenges hes lost.

Norton doesn't need a punchers chance to beat Vitali he can outbox him and land better cleaner shots. He arguably did this against Holmes and Ali, he can do it against Vitali too. And more effectively because the elder Klit isn't in the league of Ali or Holmes.

 

These things don't mean much. In fact, they don't mean jack. So you're saying that just because Vitali Klitschko doesn't have a win over an Ali or a Quarry that he can't beat Norton? This list of yours basiclly ignores the stylistic issues of the match, and just because he boxed well against Ali and Holmes doesn't mean that he's taking Vitali's shots for 12 rounds, as he clearly hits harder than either of those guys.