Ken Norton Would Get Slept by Povetkin in Every Universe

We have entered Bizarro World.

You say Jerry Quarry and Alexander Povetkin are not similar in build or style because, as you have frequently cited, Quarry is 2 inches shorter, about 15 pounds lighter and doesn’t have a sophisticated pedigree based on an Olympic pedigree. Also, Povetkin you say is a relentlessly aggressive fighter and Quarry is a counterpuncher.

So I ask for two fighters who are similar and you give me Joe Frazier and Dwight Muhammad Qawi. Frazier is at least 30 pounds heavier than Qawi (by modern standards they are three divisions apart), Joe is 5 1/2 inches taller, Frazier has an Olympic gold pedigree while Qawi has zero amateur experience of any real note and learned how to box in prison. Furthermore, Joe really is a truly relentlessly aggressive fighter while Qawi moved in cautiously and was essentially a counterpuncher — Joe had a great left hook and no right hand, while DMQ was a two-fisted fighter and his right was better than his left as a power weapon.

And Povetkin is simply not some aggressive fighter who backs everyone up. Watch Marco Huck wading in and Alexander giving ground. Eddie Chambers even was able to stand right in front of him rather than being backed up. And these two aren’t nearly as strong or imposing as Ken Norton. Povetkin will go forward and throw a couple of punches and when the opponent throws back, he immediately skips back a step — Norton would not be forced to be on the back foot against the Alexander Povetkin we usually see on film.

Povetkin is also nowhere near the level of puncher who overwhelmed Norton like Foreman (nobody backed him up period) or Shavers (who came out kamikaze style against Norton winging bombs, which isn’t how Povetkin fights).

I honestly have to wonder if you’ve really watched Povetkin. He simply isn’t the aggressive, keep-the-opponent-on-the-back-foot-and-force-him-to-back-up guy you describe. Again, look at Chambers and Huck. It’s mostly in the middle of the ring (although Huck had him on the run a few times and he was a cruiser) and not Alexander being some kind of tank who keeps rolling forward (which he has to be if he’s going to keep Norton on the back foot).

 

Honestly, I’m still not totally clear on what kind of comparison you’re actually looking for. Are you asking for someone who’s a carbon copy of Norton, or just someone with a few similar traits? If it’s the latter, then it’s interesting you brushed past the Carlos Takam example. Takam was a strong, aggressive, durable heavyweight who brought constant pressure, exactly the kind of style Norton excelled with, and Povetkin handled him with a late stoppage after a tough, physical fight, while you can't say the same for Norton

If we’re talking about what matters in a fantasy matchup, it’s not just about who looks similar on paper, but how their styles and strengths interact in the ring. Povetkin’s steady pressure and ability to break down tough opponents is what sets him apart from Quarry, and it’s also what makes him a real threat to Norton. I get that you see some overlap, but the way Povetkin actually fought and the way he dealt with guys like Takam shows he brings a different kind of challenge that Norton hasn't shown he can deal with. End of the day that's the main difference here Povetkin has shown he can deal with fighters similar to Norton but Norton has never shown he can deal with fighters similar to Povetkin

 

I don’t see any similarities at all between Takam and Norton, which is why I didn’t say anything about it.

Quarry is so much closer to Povetkin than Takam is to Norton it’s not even funny. Maybe you haven’t watched a lot of Norton. He would hold ground, work the jab and go to the body.

If you dismiss Quarry as having any resemblance to Povetkin and then turn around and equate Norton to Takam, again, we’re in Bizarro World.

Ken Norton outboxed and out-jabbed Muhammad Ali. Takam had nowhere near the boxing ability of Ken Norton.

Povetkin wasn’t a pressure fighter. I’ve outlined that. He was a center-of-the-ring guy — two steps forward, two steps back. He did not keep opponents on the back foot.

Takam fought on the front foot for the entire fight. Povetkin stayed in the pocket pretty good, but he did not force him to the back foot.

Norton didn’t fight well on the back foot, but that’s not the same as being a guy who is always coming forward and loses if you don’t let him do that (that much more describes Frazier).

Nobody beat Norton the way you describe Povetkin breaking people down. And he didn’t break down guys like Eddie Chambers or Marco Huck, who were far from imposing or strongmen. So I don’t see it.

We’re getting nowhere. Thanks for the discussion but I don’t think we can take it any farther.

 

I am not sure if it's Norton per se or just the fact people are extremely big on the 1970s heavyweight era compared to most others so they rate the fighters who fought in that era higher.

 

Just to clarify, I’m not saying Takam and Norton are the same fighter obviously, Norton had a higher skill level and a different approach, especially with his jab and defense. My point was just that, out of Povetkin’s opponents, Takam shares more stylistic and physical similarities to Norton than anyone Norton beat resembles Povetkin. Of course, there are differences, but that’s the closest parallel available from Povetkin’s resume.

In the end, I think we just see the matchup from different angles, and that’s what makes these debates interesting. Appreciate the thoughtful exchange and your knowledge thanks for the discussion!

 

Norton liked to fight right up close and so did Povetkin. One has about 20 pounds on the other, hit harder, and a much better chin. Yeah, I think I'll take Povetkin.

Norton was a fine fighter but his chin was iffy against big hitters and Povetkin is a big hitter with a wide arsenal of punches.

Mentioning winning the the Huck fight by the skin of his teeth as some kind of blot is 'meh' as an argument. First off, Huck was as big as Norton on fight night, clocking in at 209 pounds. Secondly, Huck is no cupcake at all. He's renowned as a rough, tough fighter who has a good chin, good power and can go aggressively all night. An ex-cruiser champion.

If people want to play the "yabbut he lost to" game, Norton has a much worse blot on his record, having been knocked the F out by 188lb Jose Luis Garcia in the 8th of their first meeting. Let's be clear that Garcia is absolutely nowhere in terms of boxing greatness, unlike Huck.

 

So on the one hand, Povetkin is bigger and stronger than Norton thus he’d overwhelm him.

On the other hand, you say Huck (who was a cruiser for his entire career save this one fight, so without debate a naturally smaller man) is about the same size as Norton and he went life-and-death with Povetkin.

Which is is?

Yes, Norton got caught while still in the learning stages of his career. He corrected and dominated in a rematch. Perhaps Huck, who definitely hurt Alexander, does the same if he rematches Povetkin? We’ll never know — there’s always a lot of ‘so-and-so ducked so-and-so because he didn’t give them a rematch after a close/iffy win,’ but no one questions Povetkin ducking Huck after their first fight and instead fighting Dionne Warwick or whatever the Swede/Swiss guy’s name was? Hmmm.

Povetkin also proved chinny when he started facing world-class opposition. Most of his earlier ‘step ups’ were against washed old men at the end of their careers (Rahman, Byrd) or guys who weren’t physical threats as far as power (Byrd, who fought at light heavyweight seven months later, Chambers, cruiser Huck).

I don’t think Norton nor Povetkin were super big punchers, nor did either have concrete chins. I just don’t see Povetkin being able to do the things that proved to be Norton’s kryptonite like forcing him to the back foot and ropes nor throwing/landing haymakers with nuclear force. I do see Norton being better and obviously a more proven heavyweight than Huck and thus beating Alexander up far worse than the cruiser did.

 

Povetkin didn't suffer his first stoppage loss until he was 39 years old. Little evidence of him being chinny.

 

How is he rated?

 

And Povetkin had a bad night out against a guy that would give Norton himself all he could handle.

Or perhaps Norton, if he hadn't fought the most washed up version of Garcia possible, would have been knocked out again?

If you are talking about the Wlad fight, well, any fighter might be "chinny" against one of the hardest punching heavyweights in history. Meanwhile Norton proved "chinny" against a fighter who was well within the cruiserweight limit

Povetkin has a KO% of 70% against a much larger sized field of competition than Norton ever faced. I'd say he hits pretty damn hard. More importantly, his chin is likewise tested against a field of much bigger men than Norton faced.

I do

This content is protected

I see Povetkin as being so many levels higher than Garcia that Jorge would need an extensible ladder to get there. Therefore Povetkin disintegrates Norton.

 

I love how these 2 things are treated interchangeably.

You mean this hook?

This content is protected

Norton lost to Shavers & Cooney when he no longer had the legs to keep fights in the center of the ring & just backed to the ropes almost straightaway. I wouldn't doubt that Povetkin could beat that version of Norton, but the Norton that boxed w/ Ali & sharpshooted Quarry & Stander is an entirely different matter.

Huck was a gutsy but overall rudimentary fighter w/o any spectacular talents. Norton proved he was still capable of beating fighters like that even when he was on his last legs. There's nothing in either fighter's career to suggest that Huck is the kind of fighter "that would give Norton himself all he could handle" (not even Norton's loss to Garcia, who was a good technician w/ fast hands & explosive power).

 

I see Ali being so many levels higher than Povetkin that they may not even be the same species. And Norton beat him (you can argue he won 2 of 3). So therefore Ken beats Alexander like a red-headed stepchild.

We’ll never know how good Povetkin really was sans PEDs, so perhaps a lot of the guys he got past on the way up could have done the same to him. If your estimation of Norton rests on one fight on his way up where he got caught, well, that’s generally not how we look at these things — Dempsey must not be a top 100 heavy (maybe not 500?) since he lost in one to a washed Fireman Flynn, right?

But of course to you, Povetkin gets slapped around by a cruiser and it’s just ‘a bad night out’ but when Ken loses one on the way up (avenged, and decisively) then it’s career-defining lol.

As for Povetkin’s chin, he went down like 10 times in his last 14 fights — starting with Wlad, when he really began to step up against opposition that wasn’t quite so hand-picked. The better class of fighters definitely exposed him.

 

It's available, but you'd have to follow the link instead of viewing an embed.

Try this instead:

This content is protected