1960 Patterson vrs. 1973 Norton

Floyd wins this by UD...

 

A 6'4" hitter who fought Norton when he had 16 fights and lost in the rematch years later.

A pressure fighter who often got in trouble against lesser men.

He beat Muhammad Ali, Jimmy Young, and Jerry Quarry, plus gave a peak Holmes all he could handle... Patterson got his ass handed to him by Ingemar Johannson and was decked by a debuting Rademacher and the light hitting Harris.

Why not?

,

In overall ability? yes... In terms of power? well they commonly rival each other as the hardest puncher that ever lived.. It should also be noted that Norton fought Shavers nearly 5 years after facing Foreman, when he was past it.

Well he faced two of the concencus hardest hitters of all time in Foreman and Shavers, plus beat Bobick, Cobb and Quarry. I wouldn't say that his resume is completely void of big hitters.

Floyd Patterson could crack but those guys you mentioned were light heavyweight and cruiserweight sized fighters, which believe me makes a difference. And I'm not so sure that Ingo or Cooper's durability was ever really proved.. Also Norton sparred for years with Joe Frazier and worked with Eddie Futch.. I don't think that Patterson's left should be too overwhelming for him.

If you're going to pull this " no one else did that to that guy" ****, then you might want to note that Norton has the sole claim of breaking Muhammad Ali's jaw-something no one else ever did either.. Are we now to conclude that Norton had greater power than Foreman, Shavers or Liston based on the notion that they never did the same?

People say Tommy Morrison and David Tua had great left hooks, but how many established contenders or Champions did they KO with just one hook?

How many light heavyweights and cruiserweights did they fight? Just as important to answer that question I reckon.

Norton might maul the injured later year Patterson who had a close fight with Quarry.[/quote]

I think he'd have a fair chance against him in his prime. Not that I'd bet money on it, but I can see it happening.

 

If you look into Norton's early career, he was knocked down in almost every other fight. As a late starter he had balance and durability issues but he did develop into a much better fighter once he was given proper training and sparring by the likes of Eddie Futch and Joe Frazier. You cannot deny the amount of physical talent the man had to overcome the handicap in experience, much like Ron Lyle.

Patterson would have to fight his smartest fight and take advantage of all the experience he had to give him an edge.

 

No, he's a bean pole not in Patterson's league. Yep, Norton went on to have many more fights and still never proved he could handle aggressive punchers or get off the canvas to win like Patterson did. Are we passed the only Foreman and Shavers hyperbole yet?

Rocky Marciano and Evander Holyfield says "hi." That description tells us nothing.

These guys aren't two fisted pressure fighters. They are the type of boxers Norton's swarming crab style worked well against.

Norton is a Norton does. Sure, he liked to act and take time off though I really haven't seen much variance in his performances outside of some stamina issues in the Holmes fight and beyond. Why was he past his best against Shavers? I can't see much of an argument, he was always troubled by aggressive punchers...the lesser Garcia in just his 16th fight! Cooney in his final fight? No matter where Norton is at in his career, he seems to screw up the boxers and knocked around by the hitters. I see a very consistent pattern.

Are we arguing a short notice untrained Quarry and Cobb as big hitters? Really Cobb? Big Hitter? Same sentence? Are you mad? Well, Norton blew Bobick out. Could he manage that to Patterson if a monster puncher like Ingo couldn't in the rematches? Did Norton ever blow out anybody as good as Machen?

Patterson's hook is going to mess anybody up. And he will land it against Norton as he did against Moore. The crab is powerless to stop that lighting quick left hook.

Do you negate all one punch KOs in boxing history to meaningless fluke injuries or just the ones you wish to discredit to fit your argument?

Archie Moore beat more quality 200+ lbers than Tua and Morrison combined. Ingo isn't no cruiser or light heavyweight. He would be a heavy in Norton's era as well.

Ultimately, Patterson was an aggressive combination puncher who went to the body and head and his left hook is effective enough to at the very least drop just about anyone or rattle their brains. What is marching forward and jabbing much much slower from the crab going to do?

 

True.. I can't disagree with much that you've said here.. Good arguments. Although I think its an oversimplification for most people to claim that Patterson would knockout Norton on the basis that Foreman and Shavers did..

 

Patterson had the style, the speed, and the power to win this, but the real question would be how he dealt with Norton's own size, strength, and power.

I think Ken can hurt Patterson just as easily as vice versa. I think both fighters would touch down in this fight.

But in this sort of match, I'll take the bigger, grittier guy by a hair. Norton's size, strength, and jab help overcome the speed advantage of Patterson. Floyd never consistently showed he could make his considerable boxing skills a factor against top flight opposition reliably.

Norton, mid to late TKO. I could see Patterson winning by either decisive decision, or KO, but I think he needs to fight very, very well and would need a bit of help from Norton.

 

Patterson beat bigger, hard hitting guys with better chins than Norton - Bonavena and Chuvalo. He poved he can deal with bigger fighters with supeior strength and power.
Patteson beat quite a few top guys with his skills (or should have gotten the decision), I named already two, add Machen, Quarry and Ellis.
He also beat harder punchers like Moore.

If anything Patterson is more proven against any quality Norton brings to the table than the other way round.

 

I think thats absolutely valid. This is a tight fight to call, and Floyd has some pretty clear edges.

I just feel differently and would put my money on it.

 

I make my assement based on the strengths of Patterson, his proven left hook and combinaton punching breaking down crab defenses, rather than the short comings of Norton against Foreman though Norton's lack of defense against Shavers on the inside holds some relevance.

I'm not the type to pick any puncher over Norton as a knee jerk reaction. I think he could beat fighters like Ruddock or Morrison.

 

Fair enough.. Although I have just thought of one other thing.. The left hook seems to be the quality of choice that you've taken on Patterson, and frankly I can't recall and instance in which a left hooker beat or dominated Norton...EDIT - with the exception of Gerry Cooney who fought him at 38 years of age, and had size that was off the charts comparred to Floyd... Shavers, Holmes, Ali and Foreman were all right handed fighters, and two of the said names struggled like hell with him.. Quarry had a pretty good left hook, but lost badly, albeit past his best.... The real key for some of these punchers like Cooney, Foreman and Shavers beating Norton, was that they were able to impose their size, aggressiveness and imense power on him, wheras I have doubts about Patterson being able to do this... As for skill, Floyd may have had enough to land, but Norton dealt with guys were just as technical if not more so... And while Norton was decked often, so was Floyd, and it took a much better hitter to floor him than Pete Rademacher or Roy Harris.....

 

Please read again what I wrote. I didn´t write they were bigger than Norton nor that they were more powerful. Just that they had a better chin.

Chuvalo? Bonavena? Both bigger than Patterson and both pack a punch.

Where did I write Ellis or Quarry were better fighters than Norton? :huh MN wrote that Patterson never used his skills consistently enough to beat top fighters. I answered that those two were top fighters of their time and Patterson beat them with skills. That´s all.

And who brings the same combination of skills, power and speed to the table that Patterson does? Yeah, Norton beat Ali and Holmes and Young but as already pointed out by The Mongoose he had a style advantages over boxers/movers. And even so Quarry was boxer-puncher he took the fight on short-notice and was a result untrained and poorly pepaed.

None of those fights tell us anything about how Norton would do against Patterson. On the other hand we have a few fights of Patterson which give us hints on what he could do against qualities Norton bring´s to the table. That was my argument. Nothing else.

 

I was responding to this:

Bigger than PATTERSON, yes...

Okay, well you placed them on par..

That's fine.. But if you're going to claim that Ali, Holmes, Young, Quarry, etc, had nothing in common with Patterson, then you at least have to address that Patterson really never fought anyone who's style matched Norton, and in most cases his physical attributes either..

 

Yeah, where I wrote that Patterson fought guys qho were big, hard hitting and had a better chin than Norton. Is that not an apt description fo Chuvalo and Bonavena?

I never wrote something different.

Indeed I did. What´s wrong with that? They all were top fighters in their era, weren´t they?

I never wrote he did. But they

That was my point. Apparently you got my first post completly wrong. MN apparently didn´t, so I don´t think I put it wrong but it´s rather you who somehow wanted to get it wrong. Anyway, I made my point.

 

No, I am not trying to twist your words around, and NOW understand where you're coming from...But when you word phrases like this:

it comes off like you said they were bigger and harder hitting than Norton..