Jim Corbett v Ken Norton15rds

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by mcvey, Jun 23, 2016.


  1. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,636
    Mar 17, 2010
    What you're probably referring to is modern technique. Which I have criticisms of. Boxing technique is ephemeral, it changes for cultural and competitive reasons.

    The technique that is gospel to you, may be the subject of a wise crack 60 years from now.

    Later gator
     
  2. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,739
    29,091
    Jun 2, 2006
    I've been waiting for someone to mention Garcia ,Garcia ko'd Norton he was a puncher. Corbett's ko % is25%

    and Corbett stopped just ONE HEAVYWEIGHT ,a washed up drunk who had not fought in 4.5years and he needed 21 rds to do it.

    Was it really necessary for you to get your two cents worth of hate on Ali in?
    Norton, with nothing to fear from Corbetts' artillery would walk him down and break him in half, it would not go 6 rds. Corbett would not be in it he would be out-jabbed at range and used as a punch bag at close quarters.

    Tua could box alright 84 wins out of 89 bouts as an amateur ,he had a solid background.
     
  3. Stevie G

    Stevie G Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    25,137
    8,593
    Jul 17, 2009

    And he would have been too strong for Jim who was n't as powerful as an Ali or a Holmes.
     
  4. foreman&dempsey

    foreman&dempsey Boxing Addict banned

    4,805
    148
    Dec 7, 2015
    Reznick and sr Kevin stop this **** ,i am the one who want his fame for his wars on this forum and i will not allow to you to steal my reputation lol
     
  5. redrooster

    redrooster Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,635
    332
    Jan 29, 2005
    Mandingo would knock that mo-fo into the middle of next week

    "Gentleman Jim" INDEED!
     
  6. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,636
    Mar 17, 2010
  7. Perry

    Perry Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,343
    1,536
    Apr 26, 2015
    Ignore Kevin. He is void of boxing knowledge.
     
  8. mrkoolkevin

    mrkoolkevin Never wrestle with pigs or argue with fools Full Member

    18,440
    9,578
    Jan 30, 2014
    We can't all be as knowledgeable and insightful as you, Perry! :lol:
     
  9. foreman&dempsey

    foreman&dempsey Boxing Addict banned

    4,805
    148
    Dec 7, 2015
    If you don't rate dempsey over frazier you are ignorant according to him
     
  10. BoxingFanMike

    BoxingFanMike Member Full Member

    438
    389
    Jul 13, 2014
    The problem I have here is that I feel I have no way to objectively rate Corbett, against anyone or anything, that I can relate to. The film is not long enough nor of quality that I can make an ****ysis. I can gather from the video that there was a man named Corbett, and he appears to have been bipedal, and move with the same herky jerky motion that is endemic in all film of that period. He might have been super smooth, hard to say.
    Norton was a very good heavyweight, against all but the upper echelon punchers. He was hard to fight for a straight puncher, which apparently JJC was, as opposed to hook punchers like Foreman and Shavers who lobbed bombs around his crab defense.
    Given the 30lb or so weight advantage, and the lack of available information, I would go with Norton because I feel he would be trouble for all non ko artist heavyweights, regardless of era.
    I don't think Corbett qualifies as one of these.