How good was Ken Norton?

The Bobick and Quarry wins seem to get discounted a little easily. I thought Norton dealt with Quarry more easily than Frazier had a few months earlier. Bobick was a top amateur having beat Holmes and 38-0 at the time.

Beats Johnson, Loses to Louis, 50-50 with Dempsey.

 

I dont see how anyone can argue that Norton could have deserved the Holmes fight with a straight face. Holmes controlled that fight easily outside of a handful of rounds.

The Quarry fight gets discounted, and rightly so, because Quarry was totally shot. His fight with Joe Frazier was almost a year earlier and he had been brutalized by Frazier to the point where everyone, including the announcers of the broadcast were screaming for Joe Louis the referee to stop the fight. Afterwards Quarry's face looked like a raw slab of beef. By the time he fought Norton he was simply getting a last payday and was a drunk.

 

You'd be about the only one that thought the Holmes-Norton fight wasn't close. Most reasonable scoring has that at no more than a two-point fight.

 

Quarry may have been prime, significantly slower and a drunk but still a decent skilled boxer with a bit of a dig. If you're going to write off boxers for being drunks you won't be left with too many

Holmes had underrated power too. Both fights show Norton taking it to decent punchers so enhance his legacy. Especially being past his own prime against Holmes in such a back and forth fight.

I'm not sure why certain people take a dislike to a blue collar pro who worked his way right to the top, I guess he didn't have the most a fan friendly style.

 

Agreed. Difficult fight to score. I gave Holmes the edge and felt he deserved it, but had it been declared a draw, it wouldn't have been highway robbery.

 

It was hard fought.... but a draw WOULD be highway robbery.


http://eyeonthering.com/boxing/ken-norton-vs-larry-holmes

 

It wasnt difficult to score and wasnt anywhere near a two point win for Holmes and as someone else said, anything short of a win for Holmes would have been a robbery.

As for the comment above about Norton being a blue collar fighter who worked his way to the top: BULL****! Norton hit the ****ing lottery catching Ali napping the first time around. He had done absolutely nothing to garner a high profile fight like that. Because of that lucky instance he got a second high profile rematch which he lost and then got an undeserved title shot which he lost. The guy then cherry picks his way to a third fight with Ali, which he didnt deserve, and loses that one. Gets a gift win against Young and is literally handed a title he didnt win and then loses it in his first "defense." The guy is absolutely the antithesis of a blue collar fighter. Blue collar fighters dont get titles gifted to them and have to come up the hard way. Had Norton come up the hard way his record wouldnt be almost completely devoid of all of the talent that the division had during his career. Indeed, its remarkable just how many talented contenders he missed during that period while fighting has beens, also-rans, and never-weres while waiting for a big money fight to be handed to him. The guy is so overrated and so overprotected is beyond comprehension to me. I stand by my comment that even in today's watered down heavyweight scene he remains one of the weakest and most overrated "champions" (if you even deign to call him that) in the divisions history.

 

Not sure what to say about the scoring except that I completely disagree. That's a close fight. Guess we'll have to leave it at that.

 

I agree with Klompton for the most part. When I saw the Holmes/Norton fight (I didn't see it live) I thought while a great fight, with an all time final round, Holmes clearly won. I'd have to view it again to do an actual score but there was nothing in my view that should have led the 15th round to be a deciding round in determining the winner. Norton fought nobody to earn the fight with Ali, yes he sprung the upset and arguably deserved the third fight, I had him a winner by a round but hardly a robbery. I thought Young beat him and I thought Young clearly beat Ali. All in all I think Norton gets overrated by a lot of people. Physically superior fighters that could force him to retreat annihilated him. The best boxers outside of Ali beat him (Holmes and Young). I do not believe he is a top 25 Heavyweight.

 

No way Holmes won all of the first 6 rounds and and no way did Larry won the last 3 rounds.

This was a close fight according to two seperate set of broad cast commentators doing the fight.

 

I think a draw would have been acceptable. Norton pushed Holmes to his limits and had him hurt.

I have no problem with Holmes winning but do not say that this was not a close fight. Let's be objective.

 

It was a close fight in rounds but not close in punches landed. Larry outboxed Ken in the start of the fight. Round after round outscoring Norton at least up to round 5. The middle rounds were close and Holmes could have had a share of them, they were not as decisive. Then Holmes won two of the last three rounds.

Have you scored the fight round by round?

 

I thought Norton took round 15. Until the last 30 seconds of that round, he was hammering the **** out of Holmes, and hurting him.

 

Yep, prime Holmes for sure. :good

I feel Larry won and personally I never could see Ken the winner in that fight. But, he fought well enough that Larry was pushed hard all the way, and had to work harder for that win than for virtually any of his other wins.

Heck of a fight.

 

It went back and forth. The last round is hard to score. It is a round that you might not score the same way each time. In those last 30 seconds Holmes was landing clean and teeing off..

The 13th was a big Holmes round. The last three rounds were a street fight.