Ken Norton verus Joe Louis' opposition...

Galento landed his hook on Joe Louis, Lou Nova, and a lot of good fighters. So why do you say he doesn't have the means to land on Norton ?

Norton wasn't the kind of boxer who would keep Galento out at the end of his reach, relying on a jab, that wasn't his style. He'd stand within range and try to block and counter. Sometimes he'll get bulled back or back up. He'd probably try to fight like hedid against Stander.
But Galento's no Ron Stander, Galento is better and he had REAL POWER.

Norton went into the Shavers fight as a 9-5 favourite.
Galento ended up somewhere around 3-1 or 4-1 underdog against Nova.
No one really expected him to give Louis as much trouble either.

'analysts' and 'experts' don't really know. None of us know. At heavyweight, it's not just about who has the more correct technique. As you well know.
Norton was never convincing as a boxer who would always excel against a variety of styles. Generally his reputation is built off his excellence against one or two tall boxers who liked to box at range and go sideways and backwards more than forwards.
I think he was a bit shaky against punchers.

 

How much of that is actually true though.
Where's your evidence that he was mob promoted (to the point of being protected ?) ?
Back up your statements.

He was actually managed by Joe Jacobs, the same man who managed Max Schmeling. Jacobs was the man who knew how to handle Galento, and keep him somewhere on the rails. He made Galento a contender, just as he made Schmeling a champion.
There's no need for mafia conspiracy tales. unless you have evidence.


Galento didn't train as well as he should have, (or he said he did, "but then went out and drank a lot of beer") and you can say the same about SEVERAL heavyweights. Obviously, it was part of his image and he played up to it just like old Foreman did with his "cheeseburger and SEE-food diet" in the 1990s.
Galento was one of MANY heavyweight contenders in history who weren't as lean as they should be.
Still, he went 10 rounds many times, scored some late stoppages, went 14 rounds and beat the world's top contender. His endurance and stamina were proven.

I'd take Galento to knock the cocaine snot out of Cooper.

 

Both Baer brothers , Schmeling and Walcott would have been dangerous for Norton ...

 

Harry Thomas was all washed up and made not much effort against Galento.

Otis Thomas was a good young fighter. I think he won the national Golden Gloves heavyweight championship in 1934, the same year Joe Louis won the light-heavyweight.
He was an up and comer when he faced Galento. He'd dropped a decision to Willie Reddish and had lost to Arturo Godoy on cuts (in a fight where he entered the ring with his eyebrows already cut and patched ! He was handling Godoy for as long as it lasted. )
He was a pretty good skillful boxer from what I've read. Gave Galento a tough night too, and almost won on a DQ.
But Galento knocked him out in the 9th.

This content is protected

 

He beat Nova. I haven't seen the fight (have you?) but have read various reports.

One or two writers complained that the referee should have DQ'd him, but maybe they were the ones who had given him no chance of winning and were calling Nova the next big thing.
Other reports criticized the referee for allowing Nova to take so much punishment. Most reports lauded Galento's courage and endurance, and noted that Nova just couldn't get out of the way of his left hook. The will and determination and power of Galento proved too much.
Galento knocked Nova down quite early in the fight, and finished him with a legit punch in the 14th from most accounts.

Of course, every fighter and his supporters have excuses. "Nova was fouled", "Nova was ill".

Galento was a roughouse fighter to the extreme, no pretense to be a "boxer", no finesse whatsoever. But he was a heck of a puncher, with a granite chin, and he was a force of nature.

 

Galento was never knocked out by a Jose Luis Garcia.
Yes, he could be outpointed, and he was stopped on cuts a few times.
No one is saying he's a better boxer than Norton.

If you want to disregard or minimize that early KO loss for Norton, that's fine. But then you shouldn't go on about some of Galento's early losses either. A lot of the fighters he lost to were good, it's not a measure of their ability as to whether people have heard of them. Some were not so good.
Mike Weaver lost to some ham-and-eggers too, and I'd give him a 50-50 chance prime-for-prime against Norton too.

Norton's chin was a bit shaky, that's the fact of the matter.
Galento was world class as a puncher and was a determined roughouse brawler, and he took a good shot.

Not saying he was a superman. But he'd be a real threat to Norton, who wasn't a superman either.

 

The part about his training habits, his opponent's recent records going into their fights with him, and his dirty tactics are all pretty well accounted for.. As for my speculation about his being affiliated, I have no solid evidence. However to be an Italian nightclub owner and a thug in New Jersey during the 1930's, rarely fighting outside of his hometown, getting away with fouls without being penalized and even having opponents who dropped without being hit, all point to what appears to be somewhat of a shady career and background... Make of it what you will.

True but Foreman wans't a smoker and nor did he make claims to drinking alcohol before fights.

Not saying he wasn't a good fighter, but I think Norton is a bad match.. Galento did not have the imposing physical tools to make Norton back up as Foreman Shavers and Cooney did, and two of those fought Ken when he was between 36-38 years of age, while the other dusted him right after doing the same thing to Joe Frazier. Tony was also limited in skill, had the tendency to cut badly, and while he hit hard, I have my doubts about him hitting as hard the previously said punchers. You'll likely ask me for evidence of this, and the only thing that I can offer is that no one really goes around calling Galento one of the hardest hitters in heavyweight history, wheras Shavers and Foreman commonly rival each other for the top spot. In addition, Galento retired with a 50% KO ration - Not especially high for a slugger, and beat a lot of guys who either would have barely made the heavyweight limit in more modern times or not at all..

Okay, I'll make a compromise... On MOST nights of these two guy's careers, Galento would probably be favored. But for a brief period between maybe 1990-1992, Cooper was in good shape and either beating quality opponents or giving the absolute best men of his period a hard time... He dropped Holyfield for the firt time in his career, had Moorer down twice, made Mercer's face swollen to the size of a basketball, and beat respectable fringe types in Joe Hipp, Orlin Norris, and Loren Ross. Not saying these feats are spectacular, but Cooper could have been a problem for a lot of top heavyweights during that time, with exception of someone like Riddick bowe or Foreman who simply had too much size on him - something that Galento wouldn't.

 

again

 

I gotta agree with Seamus in most of this thread. Galento had very little chance of beating a prime Norton.

 

There's nothing especially shady about Galento's career.
Firstly, the whole boxing game was connected to racketeers.
Joe Louis was managed by racketeers.

Galento owned a bar and was a New Jersey Italian and a tough man. That seems to be your reasoning, enough to suggest his career was helped along by mob connections.

Like I said, it's well documented that he wasn't even on the radar as a contender until he hooked up with Joe Jacobs, the brilliant manager of Max Schmeling.
I don't know if Jacobs was a gangster or not, but he was New York Jew, not Italian.

Galento boxed a lot in New Jersey, that's what local favourites do. Especially in those days. But your theory is weak, because he also LOST several fights in New Jersey.
Also, he was often penalized rounds for fouling, and DQ'd at least twice.

As for a couple of opponents falling down without getting hit, doesn't that happen to every puncher ? I've seen that thousands of times. Almost every good strong heavyweight meets a few who want to get out of there as quick as possible.

It just seems like completely unnecessary smearing of Galento's record to imply that he was helped by the mob.
his record is hardly amazing as it is, it's acknowledged that his boxing skill was not good, i don't see why even what he did achieve needs to be tainted by completely unsubstantiated speculation.

 

Tony Galento probably stopped as many ranked opponents as Shavers did, maybe as many as Foreman did.
Maybe he wasn't matched as carefully either.

I don't care to split hairs as too who hit hardest. It doesn't matter to me. All I'm saying is that Galento had monster power, and easily hit hard enough to KO Norton.

Galento did the same thing as Cooper but better, in his own era. He knocked down a peak Joe Louis, and stopped the number 1 contender in his next fight. That makes him very good.
He beat some good up and comers, and knocked out some decent fighters.

 

Some quality posting from Conn here.


:good

Keep up the fantastic work.

 

These were his opponents and their recent runs going into the Louis fight.

Abe Feldman - Only won 3 of his last 13 fights.

Natie Brown - Ony won 5 of his last 16 fights.

Jorge Brescia - Only won 5 of his last 11 fights, and had recently lost to Jack Roper.

Dick Daniels - Only won 7 of his last 13 fights, had regularly lost to journeyman, and was but 1 fight away from the end of his career.

Otis Thomas - Good record, but not many fights, and not too many big names in the win column.

Harry Thomas- Only won 6 of his last 14, and lost last 3 in a row.

Nathan Mann - Finally a man coming off a good streak.

Charley Massera - Only won 4 of his last 16, and would lose 8 out of future 9.

Leroy Haynes - Only 5 of last 10.

Lorenzo Pack - Never heard of him

Al Ettore - only won 1 of his last 6, albeit losing or tieing with good fighters though.

Of the 11 fighters that Galento defeated prior to facing Louis, only Mann and Ettore were respectable, while the rest were on bad losing streaks.

 

Not making any steadfast claims about him being in the mafia.. Only speculations that his career may have been handled in a less than scrupulous way, and just because his manager was one credible guy on paper, doesn't mean that others weren't pulling some strings behind the scenes, but I won't get any deeper in creating speculative scenarios. Of his 110 pro fights, approximately 63 of them took place in his own back yard, and fair number of others scheduled nearbye on the east coast. he was DQ'D a few times, but he also got away with a lot more than he should have... At any rate I don't think that officials would turn a blind eye to his tactics in Norton's era, and his poor conditioning and short reach against one of the best conditioned fighters ever, who was well accustomed to facing men of a much higher calibur would make him a huge underdog. His tendency to cut and bleed and be an easy target would probably result in an early stoppage, similar to Norton's fight with Quarry.