Oliver McCall vs. Ken Norton

McCall struggled with a 45 year old Larry Holmes. Norton nearly beat a 28 year old Holmes. I don't always count how fighters fared against the same opponent because style match-ups often come into play. I do think that Holmes is a relevant common opponent in this case. Holmes power is on par with McCall's, and Holmes has a higher punch output than McCall.

Norton by UD

 

McCall by KO. Norton wasn't better boxer than McCall, accidental title holder.

 

i think mccall may overwhelm norton, just too strong and norton at his most effective was going forward, mccall was pushing lewis back during certain times of their fights.

 

Oliver McCall and Ken Norton: four familiar Scottish names and not a single Scottish connection in either boxer!

My first instinct is to say McCall, but it's by no means a sure-fire bet. McCall's two title defenses, against Larry Holmes and Frank Bruno, basically laid out his weaknesses: not too hard to out-box and vulnerable to big punchers who could put him on the defensive.

In fact, the key to this fight would be which one of them manages to get the other one to back up; Norton may have been very good defensively on the front foot but it all fell apart when he was taking backward steps, which forced his feet to move in ways he couldn't handle and negated his crouching attempts. McCall could be very systematic and relentless on the front foot (see his fight with Akinwande) while Norton was true to his military background on the front foot, working with impressive efficiency and precision.

Power would be a big factor and here I think there's not too much between them. McCall could be a big hitter if he landed cleanly, but he rarely did; Norton wasn't such a big hitter but landed cleanly far more often and thus set up more opportunities to hurt his opponent.

As for chins, McCall has an obvious edge. However, I don't think Norton's chin was so bad as to make it a done thing if McCall connects. On the other hand, McCall could be put into a defensive shell by far lesser boxers than Norton if they landed often enough; Norton may not have had the power of Frank Bruno but he was much faster and more skilled.

Like Holmes, Lewis and Bruno, Ken brings a quality jab to the table that would frustrate McCall. The Atomic Bull may have been dangerous and at times even sublime when he was cool-headed and working on a fixed gameplan (as against Lewis in their first fight, Akinwande and in his big upset win over the once much-feared Sinan Samil Sam) but when he got hot-headed he was a shockingly average fighter.

Stamina is an interesting matter. Both boxers tended to get better as the fight went on. McCall was still rolling with Bruno and Holmes to the final bell; I was always impressed at how strong McCall was in the later rounds. Meanwhile Norton gave us some of the best late rounds in the history of 15 round fights against Ali and Holmes, as well as making up a lot of lost rounds against Jimmy Young in the final five. I give the edge to Norton, although McCall shouldn't be underestimated in this department.

There are three ways I can see this one going in all probability: (a) Norton weathers some trouble early on, working the jab to break McCall's concentration and lands some big punches that get McCall tentative, before dominating the middle rounds and using offense as defence in the later rounds to secure a firm decision.

(b) McCall gets off to a quick and effective start, works around Norton's jab and uses a mix of strength with a series of power-punches to get Norton backing up. Norton would then fall to pieces defensively and get TKO'd.

(c) Norton dominates the first 10 or so rounds as in (a), but gets out-muscled and tired out (as happened to Akinwande and as would have happened to Bruno were Bruno not as strong as an ox) before getting stopped as in (b) in the later rounds.

I consider (a) the most likely course of events, followed by (b), with (c) trailing as a distant third. So while I think Norton would PROBABLY win, it would be very close (though this would not be reflected in the scoring) and McCall would have very good chances of winning it. If they fought three fights, I'd expect McCall to win at least one.

 

I wish I could see all of this footage of this McCall that is good enough to beat Norton with little hesitation and no explanation. I am not saying you are wrong. This is a fantasy match-up. I just need a little more to find this believable.

Norton is thought of as having a weak chin. He was ko'd 4 times in 50 fights. 3 of those ko's were from Foreman, Shavers, and Cooney, and all three of those guys can bang. McCall was no where near the hitter those guys were.

All McCall ever did was ko Lewis with a good shot. It was not like he was fighting a great fight plan, and showing he knew how to solve Lewis' style. He knocked him out in the 2nd round. How great McCall look against 45 year old Larry Holmes? He almost lost. He looked a little less than spectacular against Bruno as well.

McCall has a great chin, I don't think he has a great heart. McCall is not someone who grits his teeth and out wills his opponent. Norton has shown a lot of heart in the past, and it takes a great will to beat his.

 

I think McCall would brutally KO him like Foreman did, except spread out over 7-8 rounds of mayhem.

Norton's problem was not explicitly big punchers, but he seemed troubled by anyone who came at him relentlessly (like the guys who KO'd him did).

McCall has an IRON chin, great stamina, and a big heart at his peak. He's coming forward until he hears the final bell. McCall isn't/wasn't a good finisher, but I think Norton would eventually crack under the constant pressure of a guy he can't KO and can't stop from moving right at him.

 

It all depends on Oliver. Some fights Oliver looked like a sparring partner just content with going the distance, other times he could connect and inflict real damage on a guy. Very inconsistant guy was Oliver McCall, but he always had a granite chin.
Norton on the other hand had good power and a very nice jab, but he had real trouble with the heavy punchers.
I see two different scenarios, depending on which Oliver showed up. The first one would be an aggressive Oliver coming right after Norton and backing him up. If Oliver could be effective at this he would probably end up landing some big shots and possibly could stop Norton just like Foreman, Shavers, and Cooney did when they made Norton back up and fight their fight.
The second scenario sees a passive Oliver McCall just plodding after Norton, while Norton lands his jab consistantly mixed in with some rights, hooks, and bodywork en route to a boring decision win.

 

Well, McCall was basically a career long sparring partner for a number of fighters so of course he had that mentality at times.

 

Norton via UD

 

Norton is a league or 2 above Mccall. In a 10 rounder Norton would survive a dody round to basically outclass Mccall something like 8-2

 

Agreed.

And I sure don't think McCall is anywhere close to Norton in the conditioning department. Not many where. Oliver's chin keeps him in bouts, not his henry armstrong punching volume. And McCall is not exactly tough to find with punches.

I think Kenny hurts the guy to the body. There hasn't been a better heavyweight body puncher since Norton. I see that 2 handed body attack really slowing down McCall--who wasn't a busy busy busy type guy.
And that Norton defense was open for the left hook, not that wide looping right hand from McCall. I never saw Oliver throw too many impressive left hooks, come to think of it. McCall will certainly hang tough but that's about it.

 

Agreed.

 

McCall doesnt just have an above average chin, he would have one of the most exceptional chins of any boxer ever.

But for me thats where the exceptional aspects of Oliver McCall stop and we begin to enter the decidedly average. Mcall didnt/doesnt have world class skills, isnt particularly fast and isnt really that big a puncher, though his right hand it something to be wary of.

He seems to have a general strategy of just walking down a fighter and taking their will away by taking their best and not flinching. But he certainly gives a lot of rounds away in the process.

If Norton had done his homework, developed a gameplan that kept his whiskers out of trouble, I think he takes a wide points decision.