Ken Norton - stylistic nightmare?

Indeed, he's one of those fighters that'd frustrate almost anyone that didn't have considerable power to get his respect and back him up.

I think he'd fit in well and be competitive in any HW division throughout history. How can you say he wouldn't when he accomplished what he did in the 70's?

 

Johnson, Tunney, Ali, Holmes.....all would be troubled......even Ali said I don't want to fight that turkey any more (when a fourth fight had been proposed).

Norton neutralized their jabs.

But tagainst the "bangers", I think Norton's stiff legs and come forward style would always hurt him.

 

He didn't give Jimmy Young much trouble, was outboxed and outpunched in most rounds of their fight.

 

Yeah, but who wasn't Young robbed against?

 

Earnie Shavers
Jeff Sims
Rocky Sekorski

 

Jimmy Young was a very good fighter though.

If Norton was around today, he'd do well against anyone. Even the big punchers have their vulnerabilities. The only person I think would DEFINITELY beat the prime Norton would be Vitali, but even he could be outpointed. Wlad is the bigger hitter but himself vulnerable and I think Norton had the power to stop Wlad. Vitali less so, his size advantage and strong, consistent hitting would wear Norton down to a late stoppage IMO.

Imagine Hay vs. Norton??? Without seeing Haye against anyone great at HW, I'd have to say Norton neutralises his shots early by outsrengthing Haye. Haye gets gassed by the fifth round and Norton chins him.

But no doubt Haye could chin Norton too!

In short, Norton would be at or near the top if he fought today, even with his disadvantages against the Eastern European giants.


However, he'd beat Valuev handily.

 

The style we saw from Norton in the first Ali fight was crafted to beat Ali. Frazier noted that he already had the basics down to take Ali the distance, he just needed fine tuning from Futch to take it all the way. Which worked, obviously.

Norton was made to focus on counterjabbing Ali to the ropes, then as soon as Ali began to cover his mid-section (with Ali's back to the ropes), Norton would begin to throw combos at Ali's head. It was one hell of a well crafted plan. Add Joe Frazier's advice, plus the guidence of one Eddie Futch, and put the plan in motion, Norton was set to beat Ali.

Norton would be perfect for anybody that fights close to Ali's style. I can't say that he would be a total stylistic nightmare for anybody in the heavyweights.

Now, in today's heavyweights it might be a lot harder for Norton to take on men that ON AVERAGE are taller and beefier then what he had experienced back in the day (example: Wladmir, Tony Thompson, Matt Skelton). Most of the modern men barely hold a candle to the skill that Norton held. However, Norton's body size (6 foot 3 inches) and weight (210 to 225lbs) is almost a perfect fit.

If we were able to enter a prime Ken Norton into today's division he would probably be the great American hope. I'd give him more of a chance then say Eddie Chambers or Alexander Povetkin. However, I do think the Klitschkos would be the best fight out there if we wanted to see some fireworks. Wlad's a tall order.

On a random note: I wonder if we could make a lot of close comparisons between Wlad and Gerry Cooney? Both are tall with a traditional style that's all about the KO. I'd say Wlad's got more heart and power where Cooney's got more natural skill and chin (I'm talking pre-Holmes chin). Hmmm, there's a whole lot of interesting factors going on here.

 

For the most part I agree. However, he might have had some problems fiting in during the 90's when the division was loaded with big men who could punch. That of course doesn't mean that he would have necessarily lost to all of them. But, the thought of him being a top 3 guy anytime between 1990-1996, is a bit of a stretch for me.

 

Haye Vs. Norton would be awesome. Serious fireworks. However, that's all speculation.

It's really hard to argue about Jimmy Young. Talk about a guy in which his sliding scale of skill is all over the charts. First he's starting green against Shavers, appears to pull his weight as a fighter, gives Norton and Ali fits, beats Foreman (fun fight to watch), then begins to fade away when I thought he would be able to annoy the hell out of anybody, then he's losing to talent fodder he should have disarmed with his slick style.

Looking at Norton's size and weight I think he'd fall right in with the well conditioned Eastern Europeans. He'd look much better then the lazy American competition we see now.

 

One reason to think that Norton would have a lot of success today is that many of the best boxers right now are very jab-dependent; Norton's key skill was in robbing his opponent of the jab and responding with excellent jabs of his own. He was not the kind of boxer you wanted to be backpeddling and jabbing against.

On the other hand, there are plenty of very big and strong heavyweights today who could get Norton onto the back foot, where his defence was much more vulnerable. His crab-like approach- his greatest strength on the front foot- became disastrous when going backwards, since it restricted his footwork and he couldn't duck as easily.

As with the 1970s, Norton would have a lot of success in his prime, but come up against enough suitably difficult punchers for him to never have a long dominant streak. Oddly enough, I think a younger Wlad might have had an easier time with Norton than the current version of Klitschko. He was more aggressive and willing to march forward behind that steel-folder-esque jab.

 

I think Norton would do well today.

However, the big bombers would take him out.

Wouldn't be surprised if the more clubbing-minded Sam Peter makes semi-quick work of him.

 

To me it depends on if Peter can land a big punch.