Ken Norton vs Mike Weaver

You really like them Jarheads don’t ya (lol just kidding bro!)? I think Norton would take a comfortable (not easy) decision.

 

Weaver didn't have the reputation of Foreman, Shavers, or Cooney. 3 of the hardest punchers in the history of Heavyweight boxing. Norton would be able to come into the fight with complete confidence. That would propel him to a unanimous dec over the awkward, one dimensional Weaver.

 

Weaver has a major chance here, yet I think Norton would win 70% of the time, being more skilled and a little harder to hit.

 

idk, great matchup, could go either way. I think if ken dosent ko him, mike will ko kenny

 

Mike was a slow starter w a shaky chin early. If Ken went out fast he might catch him. Otherwise it’s a very tough fight. Weaver was one guynwvterrific stamina and true one punch KO power in either hand.

 

Weaver would have knocked Kenny Norton out I'm fairly certain. His power, heart and the ability to carry his punch all the way gives Norton two way to do this.
Weaver is right there with Shavers on power. I think these guys worked together and Mike learned from Kenny.
Two good dudes who represented the sport well.

 

I'm in this boat i think. Weaver was a slow starter and not as explosive as some. I don't think he would consistently back Norton up enough to cash in. I don't think Weaver could ambush him as others did.

 

True Kenny could do things in there that Weaver couldn't. He could outbox him but Mike has the power to change the fight with one punch. If I was with Norton I would suggest he try to get a stoppage early as u stated Weaver could be sluggish

 

Norton stops him in eight (and I might be a little generous here toward Mike). Weaver was more of a surprise guy, while Ken Norton was a certified Great Fighter, kos to some of the greatest punchers in boxing history nonwithstanding. Mike was about on the same level in terms of punching power as Ken (a good argument could me made for Mike being a bit more powerful in terms of one-punch). Ken was much better on defense from an overall perspective.

I think the Norton who beat Ali (the 1st time) would simply outclass the Mike of the Holmes fight, and (though it hurts me to admit it) probably stop Mike earlier than Larry did.

Speaking of that awe-inspiring first Ali fight...I'm not sure even the pre-1980 Holmes would have beaten Norton that night. Try watching that fight again, Norton toward the end behaved like the quintessential hyper-confident Alpha male; he knew he had marred quite a legend in the field...in fact, I think he knew it in the middle rounds. It wasn't a super exciting fight (well, if we consider the fact of its historical value it certainly was), but that night Norton looked fantastic. In my eyes he won that fight handily, a great performance to be savored imo.

 

It's an interesting bout. Norton only had one ko loss after round 2 and he was well below the fighter he became a few years later. Those early ko's followed the same ugly pattern. I'm just not convinced Weaver could enforce this pattern. It would also be interesting to see if he really could turn the fight on one blow later when Norton was well settled into the fight.

 

Weaver fans should be more concerned with his own pattern for getting KO'd early.
Stopped 12 tmes in his career, 5 times inside the first 2 rounds.

 

Not totally unfair but i tend to discount those pre Mercado/Holmes stoppages as he really was a changed fighter once he found his way. Lots came post peak too. But he really was a slow starter too so Norton might be onto that particularly if he has Futch in his corner.

 

Weaver. That cross armed defense is wide open for lefthooks. Wrong opening to give to a guy like Weaver. Once that lefthook lands clean it'd be all over for Kenny.

 

Sure, I discount them when assessing prime Weaver too.
Likewise, I don't put much stock in Norton's KO losses to Garcia, Shavers (somewhat) and Cooney .... which only leaves Foreman.