Dempsey vs Norton

Tough fight to predict.

It seems like a bad matchup for Ken but let's not forget that Ken has the height, reach and significant weight advantage.

 

McV, you are being disingenuous here - your boxing knowledge is extensive enough to know that Norton was far from prime when he fought LeDoux.

 

As Dempsey was when he lost to Flynn?

 

my thinking now is that Demps is too much for Norton in the more lax 20s rules where u can stand over someone to hit them as they rise.

Demps kills Kenny back then.


Norton in the 70s might struggle to a points win versus demps, but I am not sure of it.

 

Of course. Both the Flynn result and the LeDoux result are pretty irrelevant when discussing the peak versions of either Norton or Dempsey, so why bring up Norton's fight with LeDoux?

I would say that Dempsey's 1 round loss to Flynn is about as relevant in this discussion as Norton's draw with LeDoux AND his loss to Garcia.

 

Norton was 33, a year younger than Ali was when he beat Norton in the third fight of their trilogy and that fight gets brought up all the time to boost Norton's slim winning pedigree against top men. What's good for the goose---:think

 

As does Ken's WIN over Ali when Ali was 3 years younger...

 

With the assistance of a broken jaw and a complacent Ali.

 

Excuses, excuses. McV, I respect your knowledge but do feel you at times show a pro-Ali, anti-Norton bias.

If Ali was complacent whose fault was that? And the jaw was broken because Norton punched it, that's part of the game - and Ali struggled with Norton in all 3 fights and his jaw wasn't broken in the other 2 fights.

Ali did not lose to Norton in fight 1 BECAUSE of a broken jaw. I personally felt that fight 3 was the clearest win of the 3 fights between the 2 and I felt it was won by Norton. Ali's body language at the end of the fight appears to show he agreed...

But we are digressing from the question asked by the OP.

 

Flynn cold****ed Dempsey a mere 17 months before arguably Jack's greatest win, that over Fulton, an active, young, top-rated contender.

The LeDoux loss was 6 years after Norton's greatest win, that over Ali.

I think there is a difference in degree of relevance.

 

A past prime Ali struggled with Norton and that is relevant to how Norton does against a top puncher,none of whom he ever beat and, all of whom he faced kod him,] because?

 

Dempsey was 22 when Flynn beat him , he wasn't prime whatever way you try and slice it.
Greatest win? He had more than one?

 

He was much closer to prime than Norton was against Ledoux or ****ey. Thus, that result has much more relevance than the latter day Norton defeats.

If you want to read in significance to Norton's loss to Foreman, go ahead. Foreman would like have creamed Jack in similar fashion.

 

Norton by either stoppage or decision, being the bigger and more athletic guy, same power too if not superior... Yeah, he lost by ko to 188lbs Garcia, but it was an early career's bad night, Norton was green and inexperienced...

 

Norton had equal or superior power to Dempsey? Yeah right.atsch
Norton was a month off of 27 years old and had 16 fights under his belt when he fought 15 fight Garcia.