How highly can we rate Ken Norton?

I like Norton and his resume is not bad by any stretch. For my money I would call him a top 25-35 ATG...I probably wouldn't even question anyone overtly over a 20-25 type ranking although I just don't see it. Perhaps gaining a 2nd (or even a potential 3rd) win over Ali and/or getting the nod against Holmes (although I had Holmes winning that fight) would push him into the top 20 it just does not translate into actual reality.

H2H he is interesting and in the ballpark with guys like Floyd, Walcott, Charles, Tunney IMHO!

 

h2h low end top 15 imo

 

30-40 for me.

 

Tough guy, good fighter but not great.

He had a great trainer and knew how to listen, but ultimately styles make fights and for whatever reason his style was made for Ali. Those fights made him.

Obviously couldn't stand up to true punchers -- George and Shavers made that clear.

 

He was similar to Floyd Patterson in that he could blow hot or cold, depending on the fight. Not a ton of separation in resume between the two either, although I suppose Patterson rates a few spots higher.

 

Quarry was shot when he fought Norton. He was also terribly out of shape, soft in the midsection.

 

Quarry had only about 3 weeks advanced noticed for the fight.

Norton was scheduled to fight another boxer who eventually pulled out late.

 

I'd rate him between 15 - 20 in an all time heavyweight list.

Providing he was n't up against a very hard punching type who could force him on the backfoot consistently,Ken would be a handful for anyone.

 

Had the style to out-muscle mediocre punchers, but not neccessarily
overwhelm them.

I think most of us expected more from him, after he defeated Muhammad Ali
in March 1973.

 

Excellent fighter in arguably the best HW era, not really an ATG heavyweight based on resume if Top 15-20 HWs mean ATG. More solid top 30 IMO

 

20-25. I did have him as high as 12 before I re-watched and re-scored his second fight with Ali and looking a bit deeper into his resume. I think you could justify a top 15 but it would definitely depend on who was above or below him or if a biggest win was a strong category in how your lists are done.

 

Wow, 10-15 is preposterous.

30-40 is more accurate.

 

20-30 is fair IMO.

 

His clear defeats seperate him from top tier champions but he has an argument to be in the second tier, scraping the top 20

He beat most people's GOAT 2 out of 3, maybe 3 out of 3, not the best version. He also ran many people's top 5 in Holmes to a close decision. He has good wins over Young and Quarry , while having decent second tier contenders on his ledger.