Ken Norton Vs Wladimir Klitschko

You know what, this is a damn close fight.. Over 15 rounds I would favor Norton ever so slightly. Norton has all the awkawrdness, power, and strength to give Wlad fits. And he has 15 round stamina. Even in the 12 round limit, he might stop Wlad himself. Very close matchup. Believe it or not ken ranks higher then Wlad on an ATG resume. And head to head. 60-40 norton for me in a 12 round fight, in a 15 round fight I gotta go with Norton hands down.

 

According to you. And Norton's career is over, Wlad's isn't :deal

 

that's true. Wlad still has a bunch of defenses left and he gets to murder haye. then I hope he takes on povetekin, adamek, and solis to cement his at status.

Still. Ken was able to beat the likes of Ali, quarry, Garcia, Cobb, bobick, ledoux, and fight to the death with prime Holmes. Had he won the 15th round it would have been enough to cement his greatness, since he would have a prime Holmes under his resume. Ali, Quarry, Bobick, and Garcia are better names on wlad's resume by far. Wlad has never beat an ATG in his life and never will.

 

Is this directed at me... I'm pretty sure Holmes won that round.

 

Would you consider Bobick,Garcia or Cobb better than Chris Byrd? I wouldnt. Garcia,Bobick and Cobb are decent fighters but not great wins. Garcia never beat anyone of note besides koing Ken Norton and outpointing Al Jones and had already lost twice to mediocre competition before beating Norton. Bobick was also a fighter who only had two notable wins on his resume and never won another notable fight after losing to Norton. And Cobbs only notable win was against a way past his prime shavers and would later lose to Holmes in one of the most one sided title fights ever

 

Ken Norton is no doubt a great fighter, but he wouldn't get an opportunity to lay into a Wladimir standing with his back to the ropes. Whether yous like it or not, Wlad will tie him up every time and then take the fight back to the centre of the ring. I haven't seen enough of Norton to give a firm opinion, but regardless of what era he fought in he still has to overcome Wlad's rangey fighting style like any other fighter. Norton is no Frazier or Tyson

Of course, I'm bais in favour of Klitschko. You can take what I say with a pinch of salt. But it would be nice if some of the classic posters were willing to admit they are bias in favour of the 70s fighter

 

yeah, better then that version of Byrd. Bobick had a great backround and was coming off of a win over wepner. Garcia was a very good puncher and contender.
Cobb was a badass who could take a shot, and was definitely a very tough cotender. sort of a George chuvalo. he never had the skills or speed but he was still a good contender.
yeah I'd say those are all solid wins. Byrd would have trouble with bobick and Garcia.

 

He wouldn't nessescarily need him on the ropes. Ken was strong enough to bull him to the ropes though. Once he has him there he will do some painful work on wlad. I don't think wlad is way stronger then norton. norton was a very strong guy and wouldnt get tied up every time, with an unbiased referee. Obviously norton can't compare to Tyson or Frazier, but he could still beat wlad, he doesn't have to be Frazier or Tyson

I'm not really bias. I said this fight is close. 12 rounds is pickem because norton doesn't have a very good chin and he's more likely to get caught the earlier in the fight.

 

Wlad fought Chris Byrd twice, he beat him in 2000 when Byrd was at his prime aswell. As for the fight, Norton never fought a fighter as big or as tall as wlad combined with very good skills. Some people might worry about Wlads chin in this because Norton was a heavy puncher but Norton could be stopped himself. His chin wasnt all that solid and he was down and knocked out multiple times in his career. I think Wlad wears him down with his jab and stops him late. Norton wont be able to outbox Klitschko so he has to stop him to win imo.

 

hmmm, interesting match up and like the posts so far. clearly norton would be the best fighter wlad has faced, but the reverse is certainly not true.

norton's weakness was fighters who could back him up and force him on the backfoot. he was EXTREMELY hard to outbox and was so awkward, he could dictate the terms and distance of the fight with most boxers.

could wlad back him up and force him on the defensive? could wlad land early enough to discourage norton? could norton keep it in the middle and wear down wlad's body enough for a late round KO? or could norton pull the bobick treatment on him?

more than likely i see wlad establishing his superior jab and movement early, as ali did in the second fight. for 6 rounds, wlad would dictate the pace but struggle to land the right cleanly or consistently. over the second half, norton would cut into wlad's lead much like the latter two ali fights.

it's done to the wire but after a ferocious last round (the most exciting of wlad's career) he shows just a touch more pop and gets the judges nod.

it's a tight split decision that, like most in his career, goes against norton

 

People worry about wlad's chin because wlad got stopped by purity, sanders, and Brewster. norton only got stopped by elite punchers. I don't see how norton wouldn't outbox wlad. he has a great jab and good speed himself.

 

Garcia, Cobb and Bobick. The Holy Trinity.

 

Who would? Only the kind of clown that scored Ali beating Berbick, I imagine. Bobick was a myth, Cobb a punchbag for top contenders and Garcia flattened by virtually every top 10 fighter he ever met. :!: