View Full Version : How good was Ken Norton?


Kid Canada
12-19-2005, 02:35 PM
Ken Norton fought during what was arguably the greatest era ever for heavyweights. He`s one of only 2 guys to be Ali during his prime. But he also lost to Ali as well as Frazier, Foreman, Holmes and Ernie Shavers. I believe in a different era, like now, he would be a dominant heavyweight.

Dempsey 1919
12-19-2005, 02:40 PM
Ken Norton fought during what was arguably the greatest era ever for heavyweights. He`s one of only 2 guys to be Ali during his prime. But he also lost to Ali as well as Frazier, Foreman, Holmes and Ernie Shavers. I believe in a different era, like now, he would be a dominant heavyweight.

first of all, nobody beat ali in his prime ok? ali was friggin' 31 when they fought! you call that a prime? some people say frazier wasn't in his prime when he fought ali the first time when he was 27! so imagine how ali was at 31.

and to answer your question, norton was pretty good. he was good enough to beat ali. but he had an awkward style that would be suicide against a big puncher.

M26
12-19-2005, 05:25 PM
Ken Norton fought during what was arguably the greatest era ever for heavyweights. He`s one of only 2 guys to be Ali during his prime. But he also lost to Ali as well as Frazier, Foreman, Holmes and Ernie Shavers. I believe in a different era, like now, he would be a dominant heavyweight.

Ken Norton was a very good fighter. He was not great how ever, and him defeating Muhammad Ali is a typical example of the "styles makes fights" principle.

He would probably dominate the division of today.

By the way, Norton didn't lose to Joe Frazier. They never fought. He would probably lose if they had fought though..

MickyHatton
12-19-2005, 06:03 PM
I think he was a decent fighter but no more, he could box a bit and punch but he was knocked out four times although two of those times were against two of the hardest hitters ever in Foreman and Shavers.

Ali did have trouble with him and lost once against him but beat him twice in returns and we are talking about an Ali then past his best so I dont think it means that much after all Ali lost to a couple of fighters that wouldn't have been fit to tie his boot laces in his prime during that time.

marvdave
12-19-2005, 06:13 PM
To say Norton would be dominant might be a stretch, but he was a damn good fighter. He was above average, but not great. His awkward style gave fits to Holmes and Ali. Some say he had a weak chin, but I disagree. The Shavers and Cooney kos were way past his best. He basically had nothing left after the Holmes fight.

Being ko'd by Big George is nothing to be ashamed of...ask Frazier about that. He would definitely be a champ today.

dangerousity
12-20-2005, 06:34 PM
If ken norton and david Tua fought today, Norton would have his back on the canvas in the first round.

Da Iceman
12-20-2005, 08:52 PM
norton was one of the greatest of all time, very underrated boxer, only man to beat ali 3 times

THE REAL NINJA
12-21-2005, 03:29 AM
he was good i don't know if he is great. if it was up to me he would not be in the hall of fame even if i am a fan of his .yes he could beat a Byrd a Ruiz and some of the others but never a Tyson, Holyfield, Bowe, Lewis,maybe not even a Buster Douglas well ok maybe a buster . but for the most part his claim to fame was that he beat and had some good fights with Ali and the Holmes fight. dont forget he was given his title and never won it in the ring ..you can't even say that about Buster. where do i rate him around the same as the bone crusher smith's the ruiz's of boxing not the best but not the worst .. it would be hard to find a era he would ever dominate other then the time after holmes and before tyson and that was not long but even michael spinks may have beat him at that time or like i said a bone crusher smith or buster ...so he was good i like him but to say he is top 20 i feel is a little to much :boxing:

Southpaw Stinger
12-21-2005, 08:15 AM
norton was one of the greatest of all time, very underrated boxer, only man to beat ali 3 times

He beat Ali once man. And Ali was past his prime.

everlast99
12-21-2005, 12:16 PM
imagine if he was around today, he would be the champ for a long while

Dempsey 1919
12-21-2005, 12:38 PM
norton was one of the greatest of all time, very underrated boxer, only man to beat ali 3 times

shut the heck up you fool! he beat ali once, and ali was past his prime in all three bouts, and norton was in his prime in two of them. nobody beat ali more than once, and if it not for the layoff, nobody would beat ali period!

Brassangel
12-21-2005, 02:01 PM
I don't know how safe it is to say things like, "If Ali never would have had a layoff..." and "31 is way beyond his prime years...". Muhammad Ali was still in his prime, he just wasn't in his top-notch physical prime any longer. He was a smarter boxer then, however, and could better use the resources of the ring to dominate a stronger opponent. While Ken Norton only chalked up one "W" against Ali, it was clear throughout all three fights that Norton had Ali's number. At least a 1970's Ali where he fought differently than he did in the 1960's. The 60's Ali probably wouldn't have had any trouble with Ken Norton because his finesse could carry the fight moreso than the need to wear people down by taking abuse.

In regards to the layoff: we'll never know. Ali did have a layoff, so that's all that we have to go by. The same can be said for Tyson joining Don King's camp and the ensuing prison sentence.

To the topic at hand...
Norton was a good fighter, probably not great though. He did have some mighty stiff competition. Whether or not he'd be great today is still a matter of the difference in conditioning, fight styles, and training. Like many of these threads, this will be an argument in a vacuum. :boxing:

Da Iceman
12-21-2005, 03:43 PM
norton beat ali 3 times and he was robbed twice *****! how can you be so sure he would be undefeated, if he fought larry holmes in 81 without a layoff he would still be incredibly washed up.

Dempsey 1919
12-21-2005, 06:37 PM
norton beat ali 3 times and he was robbed twice *****! how can you be so sure he would be undefeated, if he fought larry holmes in 81 without a layoff he would still be incredibly washed up.

yeah, everyone says that ali robbed alot of fighters. they say jones was robbed, and i scored the fight and i had clay winning. they said lyle was robbed, and it was pretty close, and ali beat lyle to a pulp in the eleventh. so it probably is no diffeent in the norton fights IMO.

Brassangel
12-21-2005, 09:31 PM
Norton fought well in all three fights; there's no doubt about that. But obviously, Norton only got the win once. Even if there were the betting shenanigans rumoured around those fights, still, Ali won twice. He definitely had the third fight won.

THE REAL NINJA
12-22-2005, 01:26 AM
imagine if he was around today, he would be the champ for a long while
sorry man but no he would not ...norton could not take a punch he would be kO'd by v.klit .sam peter ,tua,golata even

fistlegend
12-22-2005, 05:42 AM
hes was a decent fighter who beat ali when aliwas easily past his prime

Da Iceman
12-22-2005, 12:43 PM
yeah, everyone says that ali robbed alot of fighters. they say jones was robbed, and i scored the fight and i had clay winning. they said lyle was robbed, and it was pretty close, and ali beat lyle to a pulp in the eleventh. so it probably is no diffeent in the norton fights IMO.
i was scorin that lyle fight for lyle he was ahead a few rounds, that fight definetly shouldve been stopped, had it kept going lyle mightve got a SD