How would Joe Frazier have done against his contemporaries Ron Lyle, Ken Norton, Ernie Shavers?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by mark ant, Sep 17, 2018.



  1. It's Ovah

    It's Ovah I'm your huckleberry, that's just mah game Full Member

    13,566
    17,005
    Sep 5, 2016
    And Norton fought much better against Ali than Lyle or Foreman did. That's a bit of a dumb line of reasoning, no?
     
  2. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,430
    May 4, 2017
    What I was trying to say is that in a knock down drag out war Lyle was a lot tougher than Norton who was much too fragile to take Frazier`s hooks.
     
  3. It's Ovah

    It's Ovah I'm your huckleberry, that's just mah game Full Member

    13,566
    17,005
    Sep 5, 2016
    Lyle was in all ways a cruder fighter than Norton. The most he can expect against Frazier is a flash knockdown with one of his wild swings before getting systematically beaten down.

    With Norton I can actually see ways for him to win. His sharp jab, his herky jerky movement and crisp combinations could all cause Frazier some major problems. It's a pertinent point that Norton struggled against punchers, but does Frazier enter that category? I'm not sure he does.
     
  4. Birmingham

    Birmingham Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    9,076
    6,776
    Jan 13, 2017
    Frazier prime against the three mentioned at their best wins by stoppage in every one of them. He batters Lyle late tko and Shavers and Norton don't see the 10th
     
  5. Birmingham

    Birmingham Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    9,076
    6,776
    Jan 13, 2017
    I cant see Norton taking Ali type punishment and being able to comeback, imo he gets stopped. He climbs all over Norton 7/8 onwards
     
  6. Birmingham

    Birmingham Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    9,076
    6,776
    Jan 13, 2017
    The left hook carries enough to rattle anyone, he throws it repeatedly too
     
  7. Glass City Cobra

    Glass City Cobra H2H Burger King Full Member

    9,163
    15,097
    Jan 6, 2017
    Shavers

    Shavers demolishes him. Skill would not be a factor. Shavers survived wars with holmes, ali, williams, and lasted 6 with lyle. He was not as easy to take out as people think. Most of the time he would punch himself out and become a wheezing, sitting duck and stopped on his feet.

    Frazier doesnt last long enough for that to become a factor. We have a unanimous agreement on this board that shavers was the hardest hitter of the 70's but we cant agree that frazier might get stopped against him? Seems illogical. Frazier was floored by bonavena twice, early. Two ko losses to foreman, and badly hurt by ali and stopped in their last bout. Even if frazier's chin can somehow hold up against shavers bombs, another thing the board unanimously agrees on is the fact frazier is a slow starter.

    So we have an aggressive come forward swarmer (with a not so great record against punchers), who starts slow, against possibly the hardest puncher of all time who throws caution to the wind and throws bombs early, and has a reach advantage too? But people think frazier easily wins this scenario? The math doesnt add up in my head. Sure, if frazier somehow avoids being koed after 5, he can drag sjavers into deep waters and expose his lack of stamina to win. Big if, i give frazier 40% chance, prime or not. Its an ugly style clash and shavers has so many tools to make it even uglier (sledgehammer overhand right, big uppercut, underrated jab, good hook).

    Lyle

    This one is interesting. I think people sell ron a little short in his ability to adapt and actually box or survive a war. He had not quit in him and enjoys a height advantage.

    Post Jamaica Frazier either loses a split decision or is stopped late. Lyles advantage of youth, brutal power, size, and non stop aggression would neutralize an older shopworn frazier's lack of artillery and workrate. Prime frazier likely outpoints him in a classic duel, UD 15. Fraziers body shots, better defense, and overall better experiemce and skill would give him the win.

    Norton

    At first, nortons crab stance and herky jerk motions would neutralize joes hook, but joe would simply batter his wide open body. Norton has decent power, but not the kind to stop joe dead in his tracks or ko him with one punch. Thus, frazier stays on him all night with kenny doing everything he can to keep him off, throw jabs, tie him up, anything. But joe smothers kenny who also likes coming forward.

    I think it would resemble the quarry and ellis fights in some ways, but the knockout happens much later, maybe the 9th or 10th. It would be an ugly fight for many rounds, thered be a clash of heads since norton gave up his height on purpose at times and constantly leaned and walked forward. I could even see a freak cut and a doctor stop, but joe would have the points lead.
     
  8. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member Full Member

    47,903
    34,359
    Apr 27, 2005
    Foreman was also coming off a year and 3 months of inactivity against a top 5 contender. Added to this is the fact he was coming off a loss, his first one. It was a pretty silly match to make really.
     
    Titan1 likes this.
  9. zadfrak

    zadfrak Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,085
    2,420
    Feb 17, 2008
    Sure was. But that was the Gil Clancy thing.

    Ali > George took on who after Foreman---right. Wepner. Smart. A tough bout so come back with a softie. Rarely do you see the heavies going back in against a hitter after they got stopped. Stupid to. You would have figured a Stander type guy. Old guys ready to pull the plug like Jimmy Ellis or Bonavena.

    I like Clancy as a trainer, but for boxers. Same as Angie Dundee---get those guys boxers and they can do wonders. But not the hitters. Fight a softie, then take on a Lyle--when you aren't stale. No matter who Foreman fought in that comeback fight, you had to expect his B game in the ring that night. So never a hitter.

    And the irony is within about 15 months, Clancy has Foreman in there w/ non-hitters like Ledoux and Agusto.
     
    JohnThomas1 likes this.
  10. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member Full Member

    47,903
    34,359
    Apr 27, 2005
    Great points.
     
  11. zadfrak

    zadfrak Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,085
    2,420
    Feb 17, 2008
    We've been watching the sport long enough to see the trends, John. A guy loses a big fight and if it's by ko, the 2 styles they do not fight next are hitters and cutie pies. Losing via decision might have a hitter but no cutie pies.

    Managers that want to stay managers do not take certain matches. And lots of times, when that B game shows up and rears its head, it can be a loss anyway. Like what just happened to Joseph Parker. They had a tough guy, but beatable, coming in at a career highest weight. You can't ask for much better scenarios going into a fight. But that B game is there &so is a loss. It is almost mandatory to fight a guy similar to what the Ortiz management did.

    Ah, the almighty dollar. Amazing how often it enters into the equation for a small short term monetary gain and sometimes not for the fighter's benefit. Actually it can be a career killer move & it's definitely one of the things I do not like in the sport. It's a hard enough sport.
     
    JohnThomas1 likes this.
  12. Minotauro

    Minotauro Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,620
    689
    May 22, 2007
    I think he beats all of them Lyle gives him the best fight Joe stops him late and Shavers and Norton earlier. I've read Joe used to get the better of Norton when they sparred.
     
  13. slender4

    slender4 Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    8,956
    2,029
    Apr 26, 2006
    Frazier loses to all the old guys, Tyson is WAY more talented and the other two are two big. Joe beats Lyle (he was a better fighter, and Ron was more of an athlete than a boxer), is 50/50 with Norton and probably loses to Shavers more often than not.