I watched Shavers live with most of his top bouts. One of my favorite fighters from that time. He had pluses and he had negatives like all fighters. His pluses were his devestating punch in either fist. Bone crunching. He had decent hand speed, good combination puncher although he would get wild at times. His negatives were a marginal defense, and questionable chin. His "out to get you early" offense certainly made him tire out quicker.
Ken Norton simply couldn't match up well with the big punchers in the heavyweight division. The only top heavyweights that he matched up well with were the cuties such as Muhammad Ali, Jimmy Young and Larry Holmes. Norton's management seemed fully aware of their charge's weaknesses and generally steered him away from the big punchers except when he got a big purse (for the time) or a title shot. The likes of Earnie Shavers, Ron Lyle, George Foreman, Gerry ****ey and Joe Frazier would always have a terrific chance against Norton because of the latter's inability to handle big punchers. Norton also probably would have made to order for Jerry Quarry during the latter's prime. - Chuck Johnston
Norton takes a fair hammering for someone that was only stopped once in his prime, by one of the greatest and most fearsome bangers in history none the less. One who had cold c0cked Frazier in the same amount of time a year earlier. His earlier stoppage to Garcia i believe was accepted as a good learning experience and one that found him not in his finest ever shape to say the least. Shavers and ****ey were in his last four fights when he was on the higher side of 35 so i don't get too carried away with them. They were both superbly equiped to pole axe well past their prime heavyweights. I've got some good material around somewhere by Eddie Futch on Norton, just have to find it. I do know regardless of age Norton fought a very peculiar fight against Earnie. He willingly hung on the ropes and from the range he allowed Shavers to fight from had very little defense against left hooks and at one stage got pumped by a right after moving his hand to fend off the hooks. I'll see if i can find the Futch stuff.
JT1, this is a much fairer assessment of Norton in my view, I would be very interested to see the Futch info you refer to.
I see your point re Shavers,Lyle,Foreman and C00ney but I reckon Ken would always have Quarry's number.
Ken wanted Jerry in the worst way for years, and JQ would have been his primary target through the early 1970's with buddy Frazier as Champion and no Ali return from exile. It's my belief that Jerry had Foreman's number (an indication George expressed well before winning the title, as well as after JQ's death), and that Norton always had it figured out in his own mind how to beat Jerry. Norton wouldn't need to cut JQ or even stop him to win. Although Jerry was shot by the time they did square off, Ken was as focused and concentrated on dismantling him as Tunney was for Dempsey I, and Schmeling for Louis I. The versions of JQ who took apart an in shape Mathis and Spencer would not have defeated the edition of Norton he actually squared off with in 1975. Even with no stoppage and both participants unmarked at the final bell, over ten or 12 rounds, Ken would take a pretty clear decision. One key would be something which actually did surface in their bout. Jerry was able to buckle Norton's knees moments before it was stopped, while Ken's self-described hardest career punch tore JQ's face open, but did not stagger Jerry. Norton would use a tight defense and keep it at range as he did. JQ's best won't see him countering successfully, or with the height and reach to stick and move, and his desperate attack in round three after sustaining that cut saw Ken covering up tightly and smartly. Jerry didn't have the stamina to sustain a Frazier like swarm. Foreman would be a very different matter for JQ. George liked to fight at Jerry's preferred range, was much slower, had a higher center of gravity and could be countered easily. JQ's commentary on Foreman-Denis betrays a good understanding of George by Jerry, although JQ doesn't overtly express it. (He's also very careful not to badmouth or denigrate Foreman in any way, admitting with some hesitation about sparring George when unexpectedly asked. It was already common knowledge that Foreman avoided him for years after Jerry took him to school in sparring, but building both competitors up was the job he was getting paid for, and he did it professionally, as this was his career now, however plastered he was with broadcast colleague/drinking buddy Tom Brookshier. Sober sportscasters kinda suck!)
Forgot about Tom Brookshire. Another announcer who made listening to the 70's fights fun. CBS Sports Spectacular, ABC Wide World of Sports, & NBC Sportsworld showing "live" and delayed fights on Sat & Sundays.
First I knew people on the west coast back in the 70's that saw Quarry knock Norton cold during sparring. Now this was early Norton and near prime Quarry. In a real bout both at their best I would always favor top level opposition over Quarry as he lost his biggest bouts. That being the case no chance Jerry beats prime Foreman.
Like mentioned earlier, Kenny isn't exactly a fireball out of the gate. 3 or 4 rounds and he's hitting on all cylinders and a different guy. But early on, nobody had to remind shavers to unload early. So I think it goes back to styles and Kenny can't back him up until the 3rd or 4th round. Prior to that, he's the guy backing up and that defense just won't work against thos incoming missiles. And once hurt, there is nowhere for him to go. the thing with their match was Norton was the 2-1 favorite. I thought it was free money, much like Brewster/Golata.
Yes definitely Norton was SHOT. Four bouts before the bitter end the "murder" w/ what's-his-name, ****ey. Look at how Ken did against Scott LeDoux! Evidence galore! Shavers less towards the end. Very "inconsistent" boxer! Norton definitely rated above Ernie Shavers. The 1-up is the only debate here [like it, someone counter the *rating! : ) Will be "good laugh!" : )] Norton would no doubt win, other times. & the comments Ken vs George! Forget that. I see this LIVE TELECAST. Ken "SCARRED". Foreman fight hard to find ~much~ redemption for Ken. Could of been worse even is all their team could of said. I think!
The BoxRec fight bio puts the odds at 9-5. I'm unexperienced w/ "betting" thus......I don't know what you mean..Sir(!) by "free money a.s.o.
TJQF I think is "down", at least at moment! But.....we talked a lot about George Foreman. Foreman has an uncanny respect for JQ. Boxing is a "strange" Sport. LOOK WHAT HAPPENED Stander- Shavers. That is the one fight maybe exception. I WOULD NOT RULE IT OUT, &....I'm a realist with this..
Going in it was Shavers who was thought to be the shot fighter, based on his performance against Holmes & subsequent fights out of the spotlight against nobodies. Norton had come off a strong '77 and a narrow loss to Holmes & an impressive TV win against Stephens in '78. He was bigger and thought to be younger. In the context of the times, it's not hard to see why Norton was favored. Interestingly Howard Cosell mentioned in his commentary that many writers gave Shavers a good chance. To my eyes he looked a lot sharper than Norton even before landing the damaging blows. I think Shavers was really up for this fight. I'd bet, but not a lot, a year earlier we'd see a different result. Norton, post-Young and pre-Holmes and chomping at the bit for a shot at Leon Spinks, would take the Shavers who fought Holmes the first time. In March 78 they were each in different places mentally than they were in March 79.
Found this guys, should have time to post Saturday night. Spoiler - It has me leaning toward Shavers might always have his number.