ken norton overated or underated?

Norton's crowing is champ is just about the only time I'm glad that a fighter won his crown in the boardroom rather than the ring. He deserved it after the 3rd Ali fight.

 

Yu really believe he beat Holmes?

 

Sonny Liston pretty much says what I would have said.

 

I think a lot of Ken's rating is based on the presumption that he would have been the challenger most likely to eventually dethrone Ali for the first time, if Muhammad had never gone into exile. Hence, there's an expectation that he would have actually won the title in the ring.

Always in top condition, Kenny was something of a head case (much like Jerry Quarry). Norton won matches he should have lost, and lost matches he should have won. For his era, he was Max Schmeling to Ali's Joe Louis, the one who proved that defeating Ali did not require superhuman powers. He also rebounded from devastating setbacks to Garcia, Ali, Foreman, Holmes, Shavers, and finally, followed his draw against LeDoux by knocking Tex Cobb from the unbeaten ranks before Cooney retired him.

He parlayed his physical appearance into a mainstream recognition and success which eludes modern boxers (with the exeption of Holyfield). No non-champion in boxing has approached his level of popularity since. (Everybody knew Norton as Mandingo, long before he was ever awarded the WBC HW Title.)

I don't know that he's a worthy hall of famer, but he deserves to be well remembered for his career, just as contemporaries Lyle and Shavers are.

 

Apart from Ali .officially winning one out of three his resume isnt that great ,Im talking about winning fights Quarrry was all through,Young couldnt punch really Norton was the punchers Rabbit,so not an ATG for me,though I wouldnt mind his physique.

 

Incidentally, i always thought he was Richard Pryor's twin brother:

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Overrated and underrated

He is in the HoF for gods sake, he DOES NOT deserve to be in there.
Through that questionable idea to include him, people now rip on him unfairly and insult his skill set and make him out to be a lesser fighter than he actually was.

 

Norton could only fight going foward and he could not do that against a puncher as we have seen, He was trouble for Ali in 3 fights and the Young fight was close, Holmes finished stronger IMO in the last round but the fight was close. He was a very good contender but did have ovious weaknesses going foward with a puncher because he rarely was successful with a puncher...Garcia KO BY 8,Foreman KO by 2, Shavers Ko2, Cooney KO 1 and even though the Ledoux fight went 10, Norton was down 2 times and almost out in there fight declared a draw

 

This content is protected

 

Just about right, I'd say.

Yes he did get bombed out of there early by some big hitters, but over the fight with Holmes and the three fights with Ali he showed his quality.

 

It was a death even fight who could have scored either way. Or do you disagree?

 

I felt it was very close, but I'd still have to give the fight to Holmes, and it most certainly was not a robbery as some like to claim.

 

Maybe he dose.

Some people want an exclusive Hall of Fame. I don't. The IBHOF is often the only way people learn about special historical fighters.

Nobody can question Nortons historical splash so let him in but there are a few guys who should have been in before him.

 

There's no way he beat Holmes that night. Holmes won that fight by atleast two rounds.

 

As long as people dont rank Norton over Ali, Fraizer, Foreman, Louis, Marciano, Dempsey, Jeff, Johnson, Sullivan, Walcott, Charles, Patterson, Tyson, Holyfiled, Lewis, Corbett, Tunney, Schemling, Liston, Holmes, and a few others. Than I ok with were ever they rank Norton.