Ken Norton Versus Tyson Fury

Great post 100% agree

 

Tryna ignore this thread is like trying to pretend you can't see how big Barry Gibb's balls are through his jeans. You try to play it off but you're like obsessed by it forever afterwards. Platonically.

 

Actually a tough match to analyze here.

Fury has a longer jab than Holmes and Ali, and he uses feints quite a bit more than them which imo would throw Norton off and make it difficult for him to parry his jab. Fury also has a good uppercut and isn’t as reliant on his right hand as the other two are, so he’d catch Norton more.

That being said Norton’s body attack and pressure will be far more brutal here, and Holmes and Ali had noticeably higher work-rate than Fury to keep up with Norton’s pace.

I think Fury needs to follow a Wilder II-esque plan here, just push back and maul Norton with inside uppercuts and shovel hooks, as Norton cannot fight going backwards. If he tries to box at range he might just get outworked.

 

Fury finds a home for that uppercut consistently, and the version who beat Wilder in the 2nd fight would probably win easier than the movement version of Fury.

 

Fury would murk Norton

 

I’ve thought carefully about this one before answering. The arguments for Norton are compelling and to me Fury is just big, the pituitary cases have ruined heavyweight boxing for me and I would love to see them punching at air chasing prime Ali. That being said, something tells me Fury prevails here.