Ken Norton v Buster Douglas

I concur.

 

Norton stops him

 

I'd say they are reasoning this way with that version of Douglas because it was the only time anyone saw him visibly determined, in shape and refusing to buckle. He was also putting on an absolute clinic and showing a great all around game.

I guess they think this version of Douglas gets it done against various styles. Douglas boxed very well against Tony Tucker before checking out and Tucker was a decent big man with lots of reach.

I am in your camp and pick Norton quite happily but i can see why Douglas has some fanfare. He has some tools.

 

I think that would be doing a discredit to Tyson. I don't believe it was a simple case of Douglas cracking the style of Tyson. It, for me, was a matter of opportunity as much as anything. Tyson at a low ebb and Douglas at his high, not the least due to his mother passing away and him channeling that and finally finding the absolute best of himself. All the stars aligned for that one miracle night.

But we've been thru that and i won't bore you with it as we've done it plenty.

Agree all the performances you mention are very good. Also still agree Norton is too much.

 

agreed.



What most folks don't do is acknowledge the effects of a long sustained body attack. Let alone on the heavies. It takes away the legs and mobility. Then the opponents drop their hands and play cover up. The other real bad habit is how they start to fall for feints. And they start to fall for everything and every single feint.

And Norton had that herky jerky style from the outside and would play the feint game. I just do not see Buster handling body punching with anywhere remotely close to the same effectiveness of head shots---those he can slip or avoid or circle away from.

 

Pretty much how I see it. Buster was very....very good on that one night against Mike Tyson but he tends to get looked upon as Superman sometimes in consequence.