Ken Norton's potential Title Reign

*Shrugs*

The weight claim is still irrelevant in the discussion, even if you feel Garcia was a poor fighter.

Norton certainly wasn't the fighter he'd become, nor did he have the people he would later have developing him as a fighter. It's like looking at Mike Weaver's early career, though Ken obviously didn't have it as hard as Weaver. They simply became different fighters.

 

Agree on all accounts, but the point is he demonstrated that he had chin troubles at all stages of his career, pre-prime, prime, past prime... It was a recurring issue. Garcia was on the light side for a heavyweight even by 1970's standards, and began his career around 160. It wasn't like he hit hard for a man his size either.

 

No chin.

 

No, I'm just saying Shavers had a record against top-flight heavyweights (at the prposed time, ie. pre-Norton, pre-Holmes rematch) that wouldn't have made him a necessary duck for a champion Norton.
Sure, he was dangerous, but I doubt he would've been sidelined for being "too dangerous". More likely would've been a good credible challenger for network TV, esp. since he did well against Ali.

As for the Ali-Shavers fight, we are of course imagining a Norton in June '78 onwards who hypothetically BEAT Holmes, so that's also post-Ali-Spinks, meaning Shavers should be seen in light of all of that.
Norton bested a better version of Ali some time before and was allegedly robbed.

Shavers was very good, and good enough to KO Norton, but I dont think Norton knew that until it happened.

 

If Norton manages to beat Holmes on a split decision, there would be a rematch, and Holmes would take a more decisive fight by unanimous decision.Ken wouldn't last that long as champ, unfortunately, and realisticly, Spinks didn't want no part.

 

with how shakey nortons jaw was if he would have got the nod over ali in 76 things would have been very different in the heavyweight title era of the late 70s

any number of sluggers could have taken the belt from him and with the history of what actually happened it wouldn't be a question of what if it'd just be when and who

cooney could have been a champ? shavers? we would have probably got norton spinks which i believe norton would have caught him and caught him often on his way to a mid round tko/ko

**** things would have been really wild a lot of what ifs

 

Well........first Norton was never the true champion. Ali had the title until he lost it to Spinks. He then rewon it from Spinks and retired. Norton was handed the title which of course is not a valid way to win the worlds hwt championship and two someone else was already the champion when he was handed the title. Holmes is considered champion because he beat the former champion Ali as well as his beating the no 1 challenger...Norton. Add to this his long title reign.....add them all up and Holmes certainly was the rightful next champion after Ali. So......let's say Norton beats Holmes in 1978.....he then has wins over both Young and Holmes and is clearly next in line once Ali retires. I would think Ali would have come out of retirement to fight Norton as he did Holmes and assuming the same circumstances Norton wins and historically with wins over both other top challengers and beating the former champion he becomes the next true champion. Norton holds the title until he fights Shavers or the up and coming Cooney.

 

I'd have to disagree with you here Bummy. I think Norton had a very good chin and would go as far to say that only someone with the sort of punching power of 8/9/10 (out of 10) would be able to stop him.

I honestly think Ali-Norton 4 takes place and Norton wins a decision so clear, that not even the most die hard Ali fan could argue against a case for Ali winning. After this he either mops the floor with Spinks, loses another close fight to Holmes or gets KTFO by Shavers.

 

I agree that Norton would probably have lost the title to the first challenger who was a big puncher. He probably would have successfully defended against basically the same challengers Holmes faced after winning the WBC title. But he probably would not have had a long reign - maybe a couple of years at best.

 

Kenny would have taken the big money Arum would have thrown at him and gone on and faced either Knoetze or Coetzee in front of 80,000 people. Since he was not signed to DKP and did things on a fight by fight basis, Don King is not giving away any big money fights to a guy he does not have exclusively under contract.

So the Norton options would hardly have been wide open and actually would have been limited as to what $$$ amount Arum or King would have thrown to a title match. And Ken or Bob Biron, always went for the biggest purse.

 

In that scenario,Ken beats Joe. Frazier had nothing left after Manila.

 

If Ken had been given the decision against Muhammad in '76,would he have defended against George Foreman ? If not,I see fragmentation of the title again.

 

No. No chance. The Norton camp would have never taken a Foreman rematch. And in 76, George was signed to DKP. And there would have been a ton of troubles trying to sell the bout because Kenny's chances in a rematch would still have been about the same as Joe Roman's.

 

Pretty much how I envisage it,Zadfrak.