View Full Version : Ken Norton vs Sam Peter


kendom
02-17-2012, 10:42 AM
This to me is an intriguing match-up, a great boxer like Norton who had his worst performances against punchers versus a man who only has punch, does Norton win or will Peter blow him out ala Cooney, Foreman and Shavers, not to mention Garcia

mickey malone
02-17-2012, 11:19 AM
A prime Norton would make Peter look like a fat labrador on a polished wooden floor..

I'd give him a punchers chance against the washed up Norton who got ko'd by a young and lively Gerry Cooney, but that's about it..

Starof David
02-17-2012, 06:49 PM
A prime Norton would make Peter look like a fat labrador on a polished wooden floor..

I'd give him a punchers chance against the washed up Norton who got ko'd by a young and lively Gerry Cooney, but that's about it..

This is right!

Jim Jeffries
02-17-2012, 06:54 PM
Wait, so the "logic" is, since Norton performed well against boxers, that he would lose to one of the worst title holding boxers of all time? Poor bait thread.

them_apples
02-17-2012, 07:55 PM
Sam Peter is pretty sloppy and predictable. But he does hit good. Has a punchers chance but Norton at his best would likely be too good.

I don't think this is a bait thread, just another bad style match up for Norton. Peter is so stationary and Norton isnt one to get on his toes and start moving. But he would work a hell of a lot harder than Peter.

crold1
02-17-2012, 09:16 PM
Norton lost to aggressive punchers. Peter was rarely that.

Scott9945
02-17-2012, 09:34 PM
This poll took me less time to think about than any other recent ones. Beating a fat and old James Toney doesn't add up to a win over a prime Ken Norton.

nomadman
02-17-2012, 09:39 PM
When was "prime" Peter? Around about the Toney and Wlad fight? Those were his best performances certainly, so I'd go with that.

Norton on paper is the far superior opponent, but he was the superior opponent to Shavers as well. Whilst Peter isn't the aggressive machine Shavers was he did a lot of similar things in the way he went about attacking an opponent. In the second Toney fight he completely battered Toney with short chopping rights to the head and body and smart flurries when he had him against the ropes. Used a lot of dirty tactics there too, including hitting and holding and rabbit punches. Peter knew how to turn a fight ugly, and if he hurt Norton I can see things opening up for him.

Smart money would be on Norton, but there might be some hairy moments.

kendom
02-18-2012, 06:54 AM
Wait, so the "logic" is, since Norton performed well against boxers, that he would lose to one of the worst title holding boxers of all time? Poor bait thread.

A bait thread for who? who am I baiting?????

Capaedia
02-18-2012, 07:11 AM
A bait thread for who? who am I baiting?????

NSB stragglers who wandered into this forum have left a bad taste in peoples mouths regarding Samuel Peter.

A "beast on the inside", "better version of Joe Frazier", "similar to Sonny Liston"

:lol1:

kendom
02-18-2012, 07:17 AM
NSB stragglers who wandered into this forum have left a bad taste in peoples mouths regarding Samuel Peter.

A "beast on the inside", "better version of Joe Frazier", "similar to Sonny Liston"

:lol1:

:lol1: ridiculous comments like that are bound to cause a backlash, but Im not trying to bait anybody, just trying to liven up the section with fresh fantasy match- ups

The_Demon
02-18-2012, 02:53 PM
Intriguing from a stylistic stand point,would give Norton the edge though,Peter is pretty awful at the end of the day,i think he would win 1 or 2 in a ten fight series but thats about it