Michael Moorer vs. Ken Norton

Prime on prime it's a very tough pick. Moorer was an ATG puncher at lightheavyweight. At heavyweight he could hurt smaller guys like Cooper and Jirov but Norton is bigger and more sturdy than them. I'll take Norton by late-stoppage because he had the power to hurt Moorer and the skill to land his punches. I don't think Moorer's power at heavyweight was quite what guys like Foreman and Shavers had. Those were the fighters that were poision for Norton.

Norton KO 9 Moorer

 

Moorer was a better boxer than Norton, but Norton was stronger and a harder puncher........ Both had glass-jaws, but Norton had the better fighting spirit..... Moorer schools Norton early on with the right jab, but Norton breaks through in the later rds and begins to reach home to Moorer's chin........ I see Norton coming from behind to TKO Moorer........... That being the 1973 to 1976 version of Norton pitted against the 1992 to 1994 version of Moorer...... Norton wins.........

MR.BILL

 

Excellent match-up. As a HW Moorer had good overall skills, speed, mobility, decent power, and was a southpaw... but his heart wasn't always in it for some reason.

At LHW Moorer beat the **** out of people. He spent his first 3 years as a pro at LHW... he went 22-0 (22) overall and 9-0 (9) in WBO world title fights. After just 9 months as a pro he won the vacant WBO LHW world title by beating Ramzi Hassan (KO5). Hassan had lost a decision to Virgil Hill for the WBA LHW world title just 6 months prior.

He beat Frankie Swindell (KO6) who had beat a well past prime Matthew Saad Muhammad (KO1) just 4 months prior.

He beat Leslie Stewart (KO8) who had lost a split-decision to Bobby Czyz 8 months prior. Stewart was probably his toughest fight at LHW.
Everybody wanted to see him unify the titles at LHW but fights with Virgil Hill, Charles Williams, and others could not be made during his 2 year reign as WBO LHW Champ (late 1988 - late 1990). He was well avoided as a LHW.

He skipped right over the CWs. He probably would have made a great CW.

At HW he went 12-0 (8) before getting a shot at HW Champ Evander Holyfield. In these fights it was clear that he wasn't the best puncher in the division but he still could hurt people.

His KO streak ended in his 27th fight (W10 Mike "The Giant" White). He had White down 3 times and White was saved by the bell at the end of the fight.
Moorer beat Everett Martin (W10) but was down in the fight.

He beat Alex Stewart (KO4). Stewart rocked Moorer before getting stopped.

He beat Bert Cooper (KO5) and picked up the vacant WBO HW title. He was down twice vs. Cooper.

He beat Bonecrusher Smith (W10). He rocked Smith a few times but couldn't finish him.

Vs. Holyfield he fought a good fight. Holyfield dropped him in the 2nd but Moorer went on to win by MD. The fight was close and Holyfield looked ill but it was still a good win for Moorer.

So, a 35-0 (30) Moorer vs. a 30-1 (23) Norton. At this point they had both been pros for 5 1/2 - 6 years.
Moorer had also fought in 11 World Title fights and won 10 of those fights by KO. Holyfield was by far the best fighter he had fought.

Norton had won the NABF HW title by beating Ali. Ali was by far the best fighter he had fought.

Moorer 6'2" with a 76" and 214Lbs.
Norton 6'3" with an 80" reach and 210 ripped Lbs.

I think their power was close. Neither man was known for his chin but I think this fight would go the distance. I think both would get rocked and it would be a good scrap for 12 or even 15 rounds. I think Moorer would win most of the first half and Norton most of the second half.

I'm going with a DRAW.

 

thread saving attempt #1

 

So, apart from boxrecing how do you see it going stylistically?

 

Both men had the styles to cause each other problems. Moorer's southpaw stance would cause Ken problems early on,but Norton would keep the pressure on,and keep backing his man onto the ropes. Norton by middle/late rounds stoppage.

 

I don't know who wins this one, but I wouldn't rule out either man winning over the other.. Moorer was a south paw. The only left handed puncher Norton ever faced was Cooney who fought him at the end of his career and for my money, hit a lot harder than a heavyweight version of Moorer.. On the otherhand, I really can't think of anyone who Moorer defeated at heavyweight who was better skilled and better conditioned than a prime Norton. Holyfield at his best would have fit the bill, but not the version that Moorer actually faced in '94, who fought him to a close verdict. Norton consistantly had problems backing up when being persued, but Michael was decked a number of times as well, so either or both men visiting the canvas is a real possibility... Stamina and top conditioning go to Norton, while I might give the slight edge in power to Moorer.

Although Michael hit pretty hard at the 200 lbs limit, I don't think that he was as devastating at heavyweight and certainly not to the degree that the men who dispactched Norton were, so who knows how much of a factor power is going to play in the one. Both men had shaky chins, but not as bad as often made out by some folks...The interesting question that comes to my mind is, how does Moorer respond to Norton's awkward style, and if he decides to brawl, can Norton answer by returning the favor?

CONCLUSION: If this fight turns into a slugfest early, then I'll go with Moorer by stoppage, but only after taking a few licks himself.. If the fight goes into the latter rounds ( 8, 9, 10, etc.) then I'm probably apt to picking Ken by a late stoppage or decision.. Norton was definetely the more proven long distance fighter, and it ain't even close.

 

Good post. A draw is not out of the question for this match-up.

I'd lean towards a motivated, well-conditioned (relatively speaking of course) Moorer. I like his technique, I like his will, I like his southpaw stance, and I love his jab. I'm convinved that he could hurt Norton. Norton could very well hurt him and take him into deep water to drown him, but I think Moorer would survive and would/may be ahead on points.

 

I would go with Norton. Moorer is somewhat overrated based on his close win over ill Holyfield. He was exciting fighter to watch, but that was also because you were never sure which fighter goes down first. His chin was mediocre, and his defence did not make up for that. While Norton chins is neither perfect, at least he wasn't down against any semi-decent opponent he met.

Since Moorer had good recuperative powers (only Foreman and Tua really knocked him out) I think the fight goes distance, and Moorer with his southpaw stance may even win a good couple of rounds. But he goes down enough times to make it clear UD for Norton.

 

:good Only thing with Moorer was he was so dam complacent if he wasnt forced to fight. He seemed to fight down to his opponents.
Anyone remember his fight with Botha?

 

Good post.

Although Norton wasn't a massive puncher I go for him to punch out a decision. Both guys were seemingly troubled by big punchers, but (accuracy aside) I don't feel Norton and Holyfield are that far removed in terms of pure power.

I'm not too sure on how Norton fared with southpaws (unless there's a glaring omission I'm making in my:rastastate) but going with what I've seen of both men, I just believe Norton to be the better fighter.

Doesn't mean much in terms of analysis, but I'm willing to admit it's one of those hunches.

I think Moorer gets slated unfairly. Whilst he wasn't very durable, he could be a big hitter, and was not a big Heavy. His light heavyweight reign was forgettable but he did what he had to do. I feel he was more of a guy waiting to go to Heavy, growing into the physique safely without derailing the plans for him.

But, bravery aside, there's not too much to commend in a fighter whos mentality caused him to get sparked by someone who in his last outing but outboxed by Tommy Morrison of all people. As legendary as Big George was, at his age he was a living, breathing example of 'a punchers chance' and Moorer gave it to him.

Obviously, Norton isn't in with a 'punchers chance' as he was an average hitter, but I feel he can outwork Moorer, and possibly stop him on accumulation. I've seen footage of Moorer destroying a massive guy, haven't seen the whole fight but it's a one-shot left cross that folds the guy up like an accordion. Regardless of opposition, the size difference alone marks Moorer as a good puncher at least.

Despite all that I'm still only going on a hunch

 

As I say, have only seen a couple of Moorers light-heavy blowouts, the fights with Cooper, Holyfield (x2) and Foreman. I take it he sleepwalks against Botha? I also take it it's only worth watching for completists(which I am to an extent, even a dullfest is worth watching for a true boxing fan IMO).

 

He wasnt the biggest hitter at heavy, less so once Atlas got into his mind.