Dempsey vs Norton

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Pugilist_Spec, Aug 13, 2016.


  1. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,745
    29,119
    Jun 2, 2006
    Quarry was a ****ed up snorter when Kenny got him ,prime Jerry beats Norton imo. Norton had no easy nights against punchers he met 3 ,all of them took him out.
     
  2. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    81,519
    21,903
    Sep 15, 2009
    Both hit harder than Garcia.
     
  3. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,745
    29,119
    Jun 2, 2006
    The rules were the same for each fighter but first of all you have to knock the other guy down, before you get to stand over him.
    How many of his 44 ko's have you seen?
     
  4. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,745
    29,119
    Jun 2, 2006
    Maybe, but neither hit anywhere as hard as Jack Dempsey:-(
     
  5. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,745
    29,119
    Jun 2, 2006
    Dempsey was 22 years old when he was stopped by Flynn and he flattened him exactly a year later.

    Norton was a month off of 27 when 188lbs Garcia took him out and he finally returned the compliment stopping a flabby,25lbs heavier Garcia 5 years later in the latters last fight.

    I don't think Norton was particularly dangerous if you're referring to power. He did well with boxers, but not bombers.
    There's no getting round the stylistic pitfalls for Kenny here.
     
    swagdelfadeel likes this.
  6. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    51,142
    25,329
    Jan 3, 2007
    I have to agree. And Dempsey wasn't JUST powerful. He was very fast of hand and foot, and ferocious in the early rounds. If were able to hit Norton with the same kinds of bombs that he hit Jess Willard with early, I can't see Ken surviving. This is no knock on Norton either. He was an excellent fighter, but he's got huge problems here.
     
  7. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,585
    27,251
    Feb 15, 2006
    Inconsistent though he was, I am going to put my neck on the line, and say that Sharkey was greater than Norton.

    He has a much deeper resume of wins, against a lot more kinds of fighters.

    If you don’t agree with me, you might still consider him a more dangerous proposition for Dempsey, for stylistic reasons.
     
  8. Rock0052

    Rock0052 Loyal Member Full Member

    34,221
    5,875
    Apr 30, 2006
    Neither are big punchers with a seek and destroy attitude, and neither really went after him- they boxed him. Ken's much better at handling that. Dempsey's left hook is also a better knockout punch than both.
     
  9. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,745
    29,119
    Jun 2, 2006
    We agree.:good
     
  10. Bummy Davis

    Bummy Davis Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    23,667
    2,153
    Aug 26, 2004
    Dempsey BY KO , I'm thinking early. Wrong guy for Norton
     
  11. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    81,519
    21,903
    Sep 15, 2009
    I was more referencing his body attack which I think is the best in HW history. Plus the over hand rights he threw.

    Exactly both were flattened pre prime by mediocre opposition.

    Again, I favour Jack, I just think he should do what every modern fighter did when they moved to HW and bulk up.
     
  12. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    81,519
    21,903
    Sep 15, 2009
    That was to show he improved post Garcia.
     
  13. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    81,519
    21,903
    Sep 15, 2009
    He's the closest i was thinking as well tbh :good
     
  14. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    81,519
    21,903
    Sep 15, 2009
    Totally agree :good
     
  15. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,745
    29,119
    Jun 2, 2006
    It's been a good debate.:good