Ken Norton Vs Samuel Peter?

Literally near zero chance Kenny Survives this I don't see how he can win, foot in the bucket with confidence issues facing someone 245lbs (Bout 35lbs heavier) whose biggest attribute (not a scholar) was his courage, power and strength he's just a big Earnie Shavers lol... Mr "Who Necks" shook it off when Wlad (My hardest puncher pick) was landing missiles on his chin, in an animated sort of way he shakes his head and sneers like a bulldog... he'd just run Norton over, he'd have nothing for him, he'd overpower him fast it'd be a beat down 3 rounds tops.

 

Without me just saying the usual (Norton is crunched by Xyz puncher) I have a question… how does Norton beat Samuel? What strategy that we’ve seen does he deploy old friend?

 

So that's a good question.What I would say might give Norton a chance is his speed edge and his good head movement. His workrate is also higher. Peter is very powerful but not very accurate. Norton would have to keep up a good workrate while using his superior skills to avoid the incoming. I do have to agree that it's unlikely he manages 12 rounds without getting into trouble at least a couple of times. Standing in front of Peter and trying to trade is a tricky proposition if you are Norton.

 

Peter wasn't anywhere as good as a young Foreman.

 

The fight would probably be similar to this one. Peter doesn't look slow, in fact he looks like he puts quick, hard combinations together. Being in front of him doesn't seem like a good way to beat him.

This content is protected

 

Norton creases him. Ken had a great left hook and threw a nasty jab.

Peter got destroyed by left hooks. He was wide open to them. He was jabbed stupid by Vitali. Norton had a better jab than Vitali.

 

The issue is people think Norton loses to every single somewhat notable puncher and it's simply not true.

Peter had some power but he was sloppy as hell and hasn't really stopped that many notable opponents apart from Maskaev who literally had a glass chin worse than Norton's chin IMO.

 

Peter's stamina didn't seem that bad. He was inaccurate and not great at deploying his strength and power, and not known as overly skilled, but Kenny is going to be right there for as long as it lasts.

I'm wondering whether this looks like the Toney fights, except with a less evasive, less durable guy playing the Toney role. And eventually either getting stopped or just beaten into shelling up too much to win.

It's not necessarily "Peter is a puncher, therefore KO." Peter might not end up catching Kenny (although he has enough of a chance that it contributes to why I'd favor him). It's more like, even if he can't cleanly KO Norton, he has the tools to beat him down more slowly as well. Peter's not Duane Bobick, where Norton could at least count on his own return fire being dangerous enough to Bobick to even the odds.

 

Peter is as good as Shavers. Norton was an overall better fighter than Peter, but you can say the same of Norton in relation to Shavers. Peter by KO.

 

I would just look up Toney vs Peter I,and it's not even considering Norton was bigger than Toney.

 

Not gonna argue too much. I lean towards Peter too but I don't think it's inevitable.