Vitali Klitschko vs. Ken Norton

Vitali has superior volume, height, reach, probably a better chin, awkward angles that even Lewis admitted surprised him and far superior reflexes. Norton moves his head a lot, but to me it always looked like he was moving his head our of an adopted habit, he didn't have very good reflxes. He wasn't difficult to hit. As powerful as Foreman was, he didn't have better handspeed than Vitali and not nearly the reach, angles or volume. Vitali also was an absolute master at making opponents miss in his prime. Norton has fought better competition, sure, but in H2H terms I don't see him come out on top.

 

Your a common conformist . Ive seen all the guys you listed and they arnt close to the killers the rose colored glass croud claim . Your spewing status quo . Nothing more or less . KEN doesnt match up well here . like it or not .:hi:

 

:good

 

HARRY would prob take 50 gs and not bother . save the history questions kid . Im very well versed . And Im pretty sure your refering to the RUBY who won the title with his patented SOLAR PLEXUS PUNCH . And of cource lost the title to the BOILER MAKER !:deal Who turned the title over to MARVIN HART ect ect

 

everything underlined I can agree. as to who was the more awkward puncher? I'm gonna edge that to Norton, noone should make such a wild shot land so accurately imo.

the head movement does actually seem forced, that being said he's damn effective at it. Tyson had to force his head movement also don't forget.

vitali was good at making people miss, but with Norton bearing down I can just picture that overhand right catching vitali off guard, I can most certainly see Norton troubling vitali with body work.

resume wise I agree it isn't really up for question. H2H, as I said it's very close to call, neither really faced anyone like the other. In his prime Norton only lost to ATG jabs and ATG power. In his prime vitali only lost to a boxer puncher who was just as big as him. neither have the tools which the other fell foul of and neither overcame the others style.

Usually, especially on the general forum, I don't get involved in these hypothetical matchups unles they catch my interest, here the style clash would be very interesting and it's hard to puick a winner, but when in doubt I'll go for the man who came out on top in a trio with ali.

 

How do I conform? I'd just like to know that one? because I gave kenny a slight edge over vitali? is that conforming? how about me putting wlad as a top 13 atg heavyweight, is that conforming? favouring floyd over benny leonard, is that conforming? thinking pac won both jmm fights, is that conforming? having bruno and jeanette as my favourite boxers, is that conforming? thinking holmes beat spoon 8-4 is that conforming? thinking if vitali and lewis rematched, vitali would have knocked lewis out, is that conforming? I think vitali is the biggest waste of potential the hw division has seen since tyson, is that conforming?

I've seen your type before, you stick to your comfort zone and discuss your favourite boxer and nothing else. since joining esb how many different boxers have you discussed? what's your contribution been to the forum?

 

glad you've done a little bit of research, now keep it up and wonder at the marvel that the sport's history brings.

 

yeah some of the fanboys are utter trash. but guys like boxing domain actually contribute to the forum with insider info. guys like jorodz and mendoza are willing to discuss the sport and not just the brothers. bubby and the boss are both typical fanboys.

 

People come to me when they"re researching KID ! :hi:

 

Sorry bud but you are simply an exposed conformist . And you"re condesention is quite ammusing !:good

 

ohhh i get it now, you think you're hitting a nerve right? sorry to break it to you flower, but someone thinking vitali has a superior resume to norton, yeah I'll say it again, SOMEONE THINKING VITALI HAS A SUPERIOR RESUME TO NORTON, will never be more than a fly on my windscreen.

infact you've bored me that much I'm watching hopkins-calzaghe, I hope you're ashamed of yourself for making me see that fight as an acceptable alternative to a boxing discussion.

shame on you little boy.

 

sorry but thinking a contender from the 70s has a better resume then a dominant force today is simply conformist ! Which you are . just like making rediculous claims about unknown posters is s sign of pure stupidity . :hi: Now run along and good luck convincing people of your agenda by using condesention .:-((

 

Well, anybody can see if someone is holding up Garcia as a top fighter, their reaching.

 

no, the top fighter would be ali x2 and young. quarry and garcia just fill out the top 5 nicely.

 

a contender atsch who was a premiere heavyweight from 76-78?

a dominant force atsch that would be wladimir.

I have no reason to convince anyone of my agenda, if people like my posts, so be it. if i really wanted to convince people i'd do a resume poll just to highlight your stupidity. I'm upto round 8 of hopkins-calzaghe and it's still more appealing than talking to you atsch