Ruddock is overrated to hell on the strength of the two Tyson’s fights (which he lost). Who did he ever beat that was on Nortons level? A washed up Bonecrusher Smith (who still managed to drop him) or a drug addled Michael Dokes? Ruddock was basically a can crusher who lost every time he stepped up. Even the Tyson fights are a mystery really as who knows how invested in fighting Tyson was at that time. A Holyfield/Tyson fight would have told us more than Tyson-Tillman/Stewart/Ruddock did. We saw what happened when Ruddock took on a young hungry elite heavyweight in Lewis. He was obliterated. And the fantasy the Ruddock just “one punch” KO’s Norton is bunk. Why couldn’t Ruddock do that to Mike Weaver? Weaver was a lesser boxer and even chinnier than Kenny. Ruddock just wasnt all that good.
I agree with you. Norton is being very much undervalued here by people. His chin in his prime is much better then people give him credit. By the time he fought shaver he was like 37 years old. He had clearly lost a step in speed, reflects etc before he even had his war with Holmes. His chin was basically gone after that. He had multiple wars with Ali, then had one of the hardest punchers ever hit him numerous times. Norton chin was never the same after the Foreman fight. He still was able to have war with holmes who hits pretty hard, and at this point Norton had clearly lost a step in speed and reflexes. People just focus far to much on his shaver, and Cooney fight, as if this was prime Norton. Norton was not even in his prime when he won the belt.
He ate multiple shots from Foreman before he went down. Foreman was the hardest hitter in the division, and much more devastating force the Ruddock was, much better at cutting off the ring, much better in the clinch etc. Norton was 37 years old when he fought Shaver, his chin was completely shot by then. He had was a shell of himself by that point. He had no head movements, he was clearly far slower than he had been. He physically did not even look the same, he was very clearly not the same fighter. His style relied heavily on his speed/reflexes compared to shavers. Also just looking at the two of them, Norton physically had dropped off much more noticeably than shavers had. Norton had basically no ability at that point to even move around, just watch both fights, and it very obvious how much norton had dropped off by the time he fought Shavers. Also Shavers did not even get norton with uppercuts, he got him with hooks, Norton reflexes where gone, and he had not ability to move around, he just stood there. Also Norton was heavier in the Shavers fight then against Foreman, but he looks noticeably less muscular and smaller then when he fought Foreman.
Ruddock is on the level with someone like Ron Lyle but with a bit more pop in his punch. So if we could've seen a Norton-Lyle match I'm sure we could measure this match up better. Unfortunately Norton didn't face that many punchers and when he did it wasn't pretty. I see how people can pick Kenny here. Ruddock's skills aren't the best but he was big and most importantly had some speed to go with it. And I think Norton could beat someone like Holyfield but would crumble under Ruddock's power, overrated or not. Ruddock will definitely land some bombs if he can set Norton up. Ruddock KO5 Norton
Why does Ruddock have more pop to his punches then Ron Lyle? Ron Lyle was able to drop Foreman, man who has better chin then anyone Ruddock ever faced. Foreman fought insanely recklessly in that fight basically going power for power, but still ive never seen Ruddock ever drop anyone with that level of chin. How is he going to set Norton up though? Norton in his prime did not just stand still, he had good head movement, constantly deflected/blocked incoming punches, he was fast, good jab that he throws out constantly. Tommy Morrison who did not have a great chin, was slugging it out with Ruddock repeatedly in their fight, the same Tommy Morrison who spent his entire fight with old Foreman on his bicycle avoiding exchanges. Norton is much more defensive sound then Morrison is, why will he get starched in 5, when Morrison who exchanging with Ruddock did not? Are we just assuming we are dealing with 37 year old Norton? Because I don't see how prime Norton going to get starched by Ruddock who with multiple clean shots could not do to morrison who was trading with him, which Norton not going to just exchange back an forth in the pocket. Norton was multiple sport athlete, who extremely athletic, he not going to just sit in the pocket swinging for the fences with Ruddock. He going to constantly jab him, and crack him with hooks, clinch when needed etc. Norton has a better jab then Morrison does and has much larger reach. Roddock not even good at cutting off the ring, I don't see how he going to just corner a prime norton to get this KO. Norton not only defensively very good, he very fast, hit hard, long and he 6'3, he not some small guy that going to get bullied. Roddock will throw wilded upper cuts, which leaves him open to left hooks which is what got him finished by Morrison, and which also happens to be Norton best punch.
Norton was coming off one of the best Heavyweight contests of all time vs Larry Holmes prior to losing to Shavers and he certainly didn't look old or shot in that fight. It's simply a matter of styles Norton does not fair well vs big punching KO artists and he doesn't have good recuperative powers. Shavers didn't get Norton with uppercuts ? 3:22 = Shavers throws a left hook and then an uppercut that buzzed Norton. 3:23 = Shavers throws a body shot and then lands another uppercut. 3:29 = Shavers lands a brutal uppercut. 3:45 = Shavers lands a good uppercut. 4:06 = Shavers lands a brutal uppercut that almost takes Norton's head off and floors him for the 2nd time infact the uppercut was the finishing punch. This content is protected
No one is saying Norton had a bad chin he must have a respectable chin to take punches off of Holmes, Ali. But Holmes and Ali are not big imposing KO artists. It's more due to the fact that once Norton gets badly hurt by a big puncher he can't recover and he's never recovered from being hurt from a big puncher. Ruddock is durable he got his jaw and ribs broken by Tyson and is one of the few Heavyweights in history who stood toe to toe with Tyson for 12 rounds. I don't see Norton reacting well to getting hit by "The Smash" and once Norton gets clocked he hasn't shown in his career than he can recover from getting buzzed by a big puncher. Hence I favour Ruddock in this match up. That doesn't mean I think Ruddock is better than Norton overall but stylistically he's a major problem for Norton.
This really nails it my man. Razor has turned into some sort of mythical H2H boogie man on here. He did nothing but disappoint me again and again during his career
The fighters Ruddock lost to Norton would've got bombed out in a few rounds aswell. Is Norton beating the 1991 version of Tyson ? Absolutely not Is Norton beating Lewis in 1992 ? Absolutely not. Norton wouldn't even go a combined 4 rounds with either of these fighters. As for Dokes he was fresh off fighting the best Heavyweight fight of the decade vs Holyfield so Dokes was still a viable Heavyweight when Ruddock iced him. Bonecrusher had been a champion 2 years prior to the Ruddock fight. Yes Bonecrusher was a bit past his best but no one at world level at that time had iced Bonecrusher like that. When Ruddock fought Weaver it was his 14th professional fight and this is when he was more of a boxer. In Ruddock's early part of his career he showed some decent skills jab/right hand doing the basics. But then he fell in love with his power and started to really become a noted puncher. If you want to bring up Ruddock's 14th professional fight I can easily say what about Norton losing to 188 pound Jose Luis Garcia in his 17th professional fight. Again you can discredit Ruddock which is fine I'm not saying he's some great boxer. But I ask when has Norton ever recovered from getting hit by a noted big puncher.
Dokes fought RR two yrs after Holy beat everything out of Dokes. Dokes a full fledged addict by then.
It wasn't 2 years it was 1 year after he fought Holyfield. Holyfield fought Dokes in March of 1989. Ruddock fought Dokes in April of 1990.
You don't want to use 37 year old Norton for this thread but you choose the Ruddock who fought Morrison? That's all I needed to know.