Would you favor Ken Norton over any big punching HW?

Good question. I'd pick him over some big punchers that were rugged or lacking majorly in some areas. It also depends how far you're willing to accept what a heavyweight with a big punch is.

 

Anybody he fought who was a big puncher had an immediate edge against Ken, in my opinion. I know that some on this forum would probably give Norton a shot over a rather crude Max Baer, or maybe even Ingo Johansson, but I can see either one of these guys hitting paydirt with their specialty right hands. Either one would have crushed Kenny, and there would have been no recovery for him. I hate for it to seem so cut and dried in that kind of analysis, but Norton was at his best against boxer types with no heavy artillery...that was his specialty. I even think that Jersey Joe Walcott would surprise him with a sneak left hook and do him in. Just the very knowledge that they were capable of intimidating and hurting Norton with their power would have given a potential opponent that much more incentive and confidence to overpower him,

 

Norton took some bombs against Cobb and still beat him. He was a pretty heavy hitter.

 

It depends.... does Ali qualifies as a big puncher? :think

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RICD8ojVQbE

 

I honestly don't know what Norton was thinking in his fights against Shavers and Cooney. He just layed on the ropes and took a beating without trying much.

Atleast against Foreman he tried to use movement and counter punch although he was eventually caught when Foreman cut off the ring.

Norton was at his best as a pressure fighter. Against Jose Luis Garcia the second time he showed ability to smother Garcia's big punches and wear him out with body blows. Garcia was nowhere near his best but still, he should have never abandoned his usual style against punchers because to be quite honest that was the only way Norton knew how to fight.

 

... sure those were some bombs from Norton

 

In Contrast to his superbly developed upper body, he semmed to have thin legs, but maybe this is an illusion cause by the bigger upper body ? those legs did seem to Lock though when he took a good shot, I did for a very brief period in the early 70's wonder how he would of got on with an Alvin "Blue" Lewis or Jeff "Candy Slim" Merritt , who for a while looked like they may emerge into long stay contenders. I guess as Ken could hand it out much better he would of got to these guys first...but i wouldnt of bet on it !

 

He could beat a whole heap of fighters with genuine top end power but when they get to elite level the odds shift against him.

 

Yes, definitely.

I can see Norton beating the likes of Mercer, Baer, Bonecrusher Smith, Mike Weaver, Herbie Hide...a couple of them. Okay, I don't know if Hide qualifies as a top heavyweight, but he was a good fighter.

 

Norton-Mercer could be interesting. Norton would likely be able to neutralize the jab and Mercer wasn't the type of fighter to just charge in Foreman style. Norton would win that matchup.

I pretty much agree with the fighters Fists of Fury put in. Although if Bonecrusher goes in guns blazing he has the size and power to take out Norton, he was one of the few ever to stun Iron Mike with a single shot.

 

Today's "big punchers"? Yeah...Norton probably beats Sam Peter and Chris Arreola. :yep

 

Norton is underrated, his losses to punchers came against three "arguably" top 5 heavyweight punchers of all time, and two were when he was past it.

I'd pick him to beat all of the eighties belt holders except for Tyson, Holmes, and Spinks, and would pick him against most of the nineties guys, except for Tyson, Tua, Holyfield, Lewis, Ibeabuchi, and maybe Bowe, but i'm not sure on that one.

 

Guys like Morrison, Peter, Arreola, Cooper, Hide, Bonecrusher and others.