Which is worse, getting run over by a dump drunk full of iron going downhill at 80 mph, a wrecking ball swung at 80 mph or a runaway train at the same speed? You can probably make an argument for each, but does it really matter?
When George Foreman gave Ken Norton a chance at the title, Ken was still at his peak on March 26 1974, Foreman TKO 2. But when Earnie Shavers fought Ken, Norton had seen better days. I would have to go with Shavers who made it a step closer to the boxing rest home for Ken. Gerry Cooney later dragged Ken from the rest home to pad his record.
U know, if Cooney wasn't such a devestating puncher, Ken would have made it a good fight. Its just he can't take those kinds of shots. I think cooney would have done that to a young Norton too
I think that Norton may not have warmed up sufficiently and that it affected him a lot against guys that came out fast. I would have to go back and watch a lot of his fights to be sure of that, and I have zero interest in heavyweights and Ken Norton. In the Shavers fight it is pretty clear that he came out and fought stupidly. Was that the plan or was he not loose when he hit the ring?
Foreman beat Norton at close to his best... by the time Shavers got him he had been through the ringer already. he was pretty close around the corner to getting stopped by the likes of Cooney based off that, I'll give the edge to Foremam, and a big edge at that
Crazy that Norton-Holmes and even a Norton-Holyfield heavyweight bout did and would turn into all time classics And yet Norton doesn't survive against someone like Razor Ruddock or Mike Weaver. Cooney's KO was the most devastating with Norton slumped on the bottom rope and blinking his eyes like Gerald McClellan and seeing stars. Foreman's KO was the most dominating. He was loading up and connecting on Norton who looked like he was tripped up on a vat of fortune cookies...yeah... Shavers' KO was the most precise. Norton immediately fell like a stick. I'd go with Foreman because Norton was in his prime there.
Shavers Norton declined rapidly. After Shavers he had no legs. Who knows maybe they were gone starting with Shavers?
Norton had been declining steadily by the time he fought Shavers. He was in his pomp against George. The thread question is a bit odd tho. The best knockout was Foreman given Norton's career stage but the Shavers KO was certainly a good "finish".
Foreman’s destruction of a peak Norton had the. effect that there were fears for Ali’s well being. By the time Shavers got to him, he was highly vulnerable. Easy answer, Foreman, for above reasons.
We have to remember to, Norton was a few years younger against Foreman, he'd not that long since had a great win ovr Ali. Against Foreman, he was going in probably a little confident perhaps so for George to get him out in two, that's a good accomplishment. By the time he faced Shavers his best days were behind him, so we have to factor in that. Remember to, we also have Cooney really half killing him, that was ferocity. But by then of course, Kenny was done. So saying that imo it's Foreman that looks more impressive.
Another nod for Foreman - if Norton had any kind of a peak, it was right around then. Against the odds, he beat Ali convincingly; unfortunately, I think he fell a bit too much for his own hype. It may have been the first time he'd faced someone who kept coming forward, could cut off the ring, and hit like a sledgehammer. And I'll never forget Foreman going over to the stunned Norton standing in his corner and glowering at him, almost saying "Don't EVER step into the ring with me again!" He had that demeanor in those days before he became Mr Jolly Goodfellow ...
I don't know what happened to Norton early in fights, but the most interesting fight would probably be the first fight (1970) with Jose Luis Garcia if there is video available. Norton was stopped in the 8th in that one after going down 3 times. Garcia was 23 years old, 6-4, 188, and had weighed in at 159 less than two years before. In addition, Garcia had fought almost all of his fights in Caracas and was giving up size, age, and experience, he was obviously the "B" side for the fight, but the 3 knockdowns make it look like Garcia dominated Norton throughout the fight. Norton did "avenge" the loss when Garcia was a "shot" fighter in 1975. At that time Garcia had gained 30 pounds and had lost 5 of his last 11 fights. Since Norton beat Garcia later a lot of people consider the first fight a fluke, but Garcia in 1975 was over weight and had been a .500 fighter. I'd like to see the video from 1970 if there is one.
