Jersey Joe Walcott And Ken Norton?

Both are a bit overated imo.

 

Kenny definitely gets underrated in my opinion, though both are rather fairly rated. Great fighters.

 

I respect them both and won’t say either are overrated. But I DO believe that Ken Norton’s resume relies very heavily on Muhammad Ali while Joe Walcott’s doesn’t rely very much on anyone in specific

 

Both are usually rated where they should be but at their peaks Jersey Joe is def underrated a lot more.

 

Chatgpt leans Walcott but gives Norton a great chance.

Jersey Joe Walcott vs. 1973 Ken Norton
I lean Walcott by close decision, about 55–45.
Norton’s physical strength, jab, and awkward cross-armed defense would make this difficult. He was excellent against boxers who wanted to work behind a conventional jab, because he could parry the lead hand and force them into uncomfortable exchanges.
Walcott, however, was anything but conventional. His feints, shifting footwork, and irregular attack rhythm would make it difficult for Norton to establish the same pressure he used against Ali.
Walcott’s best weapons would be:
the right hand after drawing Norton’s jab;
left hooks while changing direction;
quick attacks before Norton could set his feet;
movement that forced Norton to lead.
Norton was much more comfortable applying pressure than chasing an elusive counterpuncher. When forced backward or made to reset repeatedly, he could become mechanically stiff.
The danger for Walcott is Norton’s body attack and physicality. If Norton corners him, he can hammer the ribs and shoulders and make the older-style, lighter heavyweight fight at an exhausting pace. Norton would also likely outweigh Walcott by 15–20 pounds.
Still, I think Walcott’s style gives Norton more trouble than Norton’s style gives Walcott.
Prediction: Walcott by split decision, perhaps 8–7 over 15 rounds.
A Norton decision is very plausible if he consistently traps Walcott and wins the body exchanges. A knockout either way is less likely than a close points result.

 

Jersey Joe is severely underrated.

Most pundits only check the stats and conclude he was not that good. And sure his resume is literally Journeyman's level with lots of mediocre performances and losses to low level opponents.

But we need to consider context and circunstances. Jersey Joe faced a lot of disadvantages affecting his boxing career. He was poor and with a family to feed, being forced to accept disadvantegeous bouts on short notice, without proper training or nutrition. Any fighter, regardles talent, would struggle under such conditions.

All in all it is impressive what Jersey Joe achieved considering all the adversity he endured.

 

both men can be slightly overrated at times but they're perfectly rated most of the time,Walcott gets slightly underrated since he started his career as a poor working man without proper nutrition or training,and when he did get that,he's already an unc.

 

Norton put good pressure, he could take a decision win by driving Walcott around the ring with jabs and overhands, using his cross guard to keep himself safe from the worst.
But, Walcott was a boxer with fast legs and serious armaments attached, proven by the hook that ended Charles and floored Rocky, or the cross that haulted 210 lbs of an incoming Joe Louis into a deadstop and put him on his back.
Walcott was more versatile with his footwork and feints but Norton was a better worker. Norton's win would be closer, Walcott's win would be more convincing.

 

If Norton had won the third fight with Ali as he should have - the question would have acquired a completely different dimension.
Norton is no more overrated than these two boxers.

 

I don’t dismiss that Norton might perhaps get more credit than deserved based on him having the wood on Ali.

However, as I see it, that negative view can be taken too far in itself. Norton was an excellent fighter with good pop in his own right.

Imo, he clearly beat a version of Jimmy Young who was otherwise giving hell to other top fighters in the division.

Of course, he also ran a prime or near prime Holmes awfully close even though Ken himself was well past his salad days.

Imo, Ken was flatly robbed in the rubber against Ali. It should’ve made him 2-1 up on Ali and garnered him the HW Title at the same time.

The cruel irony is that, undeservedly, Ken later became known as a “Paper” Champion despite having whupped Ali in the ring.

 

Jersey Joe Walcott was journeyman whose persistence paid off. Norton was a notch above, physically, skillwise, resume... in all metrics.

 

I think they're rated fairly in a historical HW sense, against other champions, or near-fairly. They are under-appreciated for their respective circumstances as athletes, for my liking. It's too easy to Boxrec Walcott and ignore where he came from and how, and how phenomenal his career actually was for the context. He's such a cool fighter for an iffy resume. Norton, it's too easy to puncher's chance him out of everything he might've actually had a fair shot at winning, and ignore what an all-around godly natural athlete he was in other sports before pragmatically riding a wave through boxing, developing a late-learning peculiar style. They are incredibly unique in context to what they achieved and how. And, let's be honest, both are full on man-sex physiques and that needs to be respected, as gayly as we possibly can, considering how hetero we all are.

 

The 1947 194.5 Walcott who decked Louis twice and lost a disputed decision could make it interesting. He could shock Norton with that quick powerful right. Norton at approx 218 of solid muscle athletic fairly quick would be too much and wears Walcott down and beats him by decision or late KO.
Depends on who is doing the rating but both are a little overrated. Norton made his career on being a tough opponent for Ali no small task but was beaten 2 of 3 and has little other credits. He was iced early by Foreman, Shavers and Cooney. His only other wins of note he beat Jimmy Young by a whisker and stopped an over the hill Quarry.
Walcott was already old when he finally got a shot but was a top contender since Louis was over the hill and the best heavyweight in the world was a good but a blown up light heavyweight who himself was already 30 when he finally got his shot at the title.