Very good or great? Volume 1: Ken Norton

Yes, but the fact is that it was Joe who won those ten consecutive title bouts, and successfully stepped into the void left by Ali's exile. When the pressure was on, Smoke had fire. Norton didn't respond especially well to these situations. Near the end of his last bout before the rubber match with Ali, when he took on Middleton, JQ commented from ringside that, "He's gonna have to fight a heckuva lot better than this to beat Ali!" (I wasn't that impressed with him against Stander before Middleton either.) He took on Foreman off his first loss to Ali, and didn't really set the world on fire against Young prior to Holmes, hence the expressed understanding that, "I need a big win," for his first title defense.

At his late 1960s best (probably Spencer and Mathis), Jerry might still have been beaten by Ken, but let's not ignore the fact that he weighed ten pounds more for Norton in 1975 than he had for the Frazier rematch, and was completely shot.

It seemed like all of Ken's best wins except Ali I were after he blew title fights. JQ came after Foreman, Bobick after Ali III, and Stephens (the best one punch knockout of his career) after Holmes.

By the way, I'm really enjoying this conversation, a pleasant way to idly pass some time.

 

atsch

Dominated? It was a close fight, far from domination.

 

The Sergio Martinez of the 70s

 

Very good.

 

I don't even know if I've posted in this thread and I'm too lazy to look thru the posts... anyway, here is my opinion now, I'm not sure if it's changed any-

Norton is a borderline great IMO. Hall of Famer? Sure, it's more about fame and not always so much about greatness.

Norton fought Ali 3 times and a case can be made that he won all 3 fights, he definately should have won 2 out of 3... in the end he went 1-2 vs. Ali but fought well in all 3 fights. He won a close decision over Young who had been robbed vs. Ali, beat Foreman, beat Lyle, and drew with Shavers (I thought Young won). He stopped Quarry in 5 and knocked out some other decent HWs as well. He lost a SD to Holmes. He went 3-3 (1) vs. Ali, Holmes, Young, and Quarry but a case can be made that he should have went 6-0 (1) vs. these men... that's why he gets the respect that he gets.

Sure, he was stopped in 2 by Foreman... so was Frazier. He was pretty well washed up when he fought Shavers and Cooney. Garcia? Yeah, it was a bad loss but at least he avenged the loss with a KO win over Garcia. He definately improved after the loss to Garcia.

 

Borderline great.....his appalling defeats cost him a place among the 20 best hws ever IMO, very skilled but in a h2h comparison we have many guys better than him.

 

ok, I looked thru them... here's what I though a while back, pretty much the same

 

You may be right, his durability is what people question the most. Garcia stopped him but Norton also stopped Garcia after Norton peaked. Foreman stopped him, Foreman stopped a lot of people including Frazier, Lyle, and the very durable Chuvalo. Shavers and Cooney? Those losses look bad but does anybody really doubt that Norton was way past prime for these fights? He was struggling with Tex Cobb and Scott LeDoux at this point! He looked good vs. Holmes but he wasn't prime vs. Holmes. It was his last hurrah, he did well but don't be fooled... this was not Norton at his very best.

So, what else is there? The 3 fights with Ali, the fights with Holmes, Young, Quarry, and a few KO wins over some good HWs. It might not be a great resume but H2H in a "mythical sense", he looked very good IMO.

Imagine Norton vs. the likes of-

Holyfield, Moorer, Byrd, and Toney. All good match-ups IMO.

How about Walcott, Charles, and Marciano? Patterson, Johansson, Ellis, Machen, Terrell, and Folley? And I really wonder about how he would do in a real fight vs. Frazier.

Tyson, Lewis, the Klitschko's? I don't like his chances.

 

Why are his losses so much worse than so many others? The big ones to Shavers and Cooney happened at the end of his career. I’m not a Heavyweight guy, but it reads more like a long standing narrative than anything else.

If he beat Ali at least once out of three, if not all 3, we’re looking at some of the best wins in Heavyweight history. If the Holmes fight was potentially a draw, that’s another outstanding result that proves his level. The Young fight as well, to a lesser extent. Then you’ve got his stoppage of Quarry and 1st round KO of undefeated rising star Bobick.

Never seen the Ali fights, though. Only extended highlights of the Holmes fight at that. Gave Young a narrow decision by a point or two. Yeah, a bit odd that that’s the one I decided to sit through among his major Decision fights. I went through a small Young phase at one point in my younger days. It may have even clouded my judgement.

 

I would watch the Ali fights. I give Ali the second one, mostly because he truly did show flashes of his prime greatness early on. But Norton did make it quite a fight later, and I could see others picking Norton, or more understandably a draw. The third fight Norton won hands down imo, not quite as clear as the first but he definitely won.

But for me, even forgetting the Ali fights, the Holmes fight was more than enough proof of KN being a top 20 ATG imo. He gave it all and much, much more. Holmes was the best heavyweight in the world, easily, by that time, and would remain that way for another seven years.

 

Norton was very good, he could have been great. Of course, Norton's biggest triumphs were his defeats of Ali, Young, and Quarry, as well as a big stack of top 10 contenders, or maybe lower I believe. Lovell, Middleton, Garcia, Zanon, Stephens, and Cobb may not be big names, but there were fairly regarded back in the day. While Norton merely has a solid career based on these wins, a large part of what made Norton such a great fighter with a pretty good legacy is his three close and controversial decision losses between Ali and Holmes.