Ken Norton 1976 V Mike Tyson 1991

gambler49 · Post by **gambler49** » 21 Apr 2010, 12:45

mugabi wrote:...

FK.... Thats a good question. If it was 1988 Tyson then its quite easy... But...
I go for Tyson but I won't Vote it just yet I need to think more.
However if it was The Tyson that fight Holyfield then I'd go Norton.

gambler49 · Post by **gambler49** » 23 Apr 2010, 08:03

I think if they fight 10 times then Norton wins 5. Id rate Norton above 1991 Tyson. But cos Norton faired so badly against come fwd puchers I cant rly go for Norton.. However 1991 Tyson was no where near as good as he was from 87/89. Those 2 fights wiv Ruddock showed that to me. 1989 Tyson would of taken Ruddock out within 4 rounds. Ruddock was a weak oppenent. And I feel Norton would of had a good chance of beating that Tyson. I wont vote cos I can't pick a winner here.
IF I HAD 2 stake my life on it, I'd go Norton.

Bricks · Post by **Bricks** » 27 Apr 2010, 11:15

gambler49 wrote:I think if they fight 10 times then Norton wins 5. Id rate Norton above 1991 Tyson. But cos Norton faired so badly against come fwd puchers I cant rly go for Norton.. However 1991 Tyson was no where near as good as he was from 87/89. Those 2 fights wiv Ruddock showed that to me. 1989 Tyson would of taken Ruddock out within 4 rounds. Ruddock was a weak oppenent. And I feel Norton would of had a good chance of beating that Tyson. I wont vote cos I can't pick a winner here.
IF I HAD 2 stake my life on it, I'd go Norton.

Interesting analysis. I probably lean towards the Norton of 1972 or 1976 beating Tyson 1989-91 but possibly being kayoed by Tyson 86-88.

Chuck1052 · Post by **Chuck1052** » 27 Apr 2010, 13:54

Ken Norton was absolutely destroyed when fighting the likes of George Foreman, Earnie Shavers and Gerry Cooney. In other words, Norton could not compete with the best punchers in the heavyweight division. As a result, I feel that even an over-the-hill Mike Tyson would knock out Norton in an early round.

- Chuck Johnston

overhand_right · Post by **overhand_right** » 27 Apr 2010, 14:28

His heart wasn't in boxing by the time he fought Shavers and versus Cooney he was nearly 40 and boxing for money. These aren't good fights to judge a man by.

Syntax Error · Post by **Syntax Error** » 27 Apr 2010, 14:46

Ordinarily, I'd say Tyson in one round, as Norton was allergic to punchers, but Tyson was on the slide in 1991 & he was never a one punch KO artist (although Francois Botha might disagree with me there).

Saying that, Tyson still had his hand speed, even if he didn't use it to its full effect & I believe he would have dazed Norton & been able to follow up with effective shots to finish the fight.

I'd say Tyson in 5 as of 1991, although it would have been a one rounder in 1988.

Heartbreak_Kid79 · Post by **Heartbreak_Kid79** » 27 Apr 2010, 15:29

Tyson by mid round KO.
The Tyson who came out of jail in 1995 had far more deteoriated than the 3 years between 1988 (his peak) and 1991

Goodnight, Irene · Post by **Goodnight, Irene** » 27 Apr 2010, 17:36

Really, guys --- It's Tyson circa 1991, not 2001. He knocks out Norton.

lucaselrey · Post by **lucaselrey** » 10 Oct 2010, 13:33

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Really, guys --- It's Tyson circa 1991, not 2001. He knocks out Norton.

NO contest here! Tyson was a tremendously overrated fighter but if Foreman and Cooney could do it than Tyson would knock him out also.

alexpaterson · Post by **alexpaterson** » 10 Oct 2010, 15:41

Bad fight for Norton IMO. I think Tyson would stop him early and ferociously

gilgamesh · Post by **gilgamesh** » 10 Oct 2010, 18:17

Tyson 87-89 beats Norton by KO in 1 or 2 rounds. Tyson 1991 beats Norton but it probably takes him until the 6th or 7th to get it done.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 10 Oct 2010, 18:47

Seems like just the sort of fight that Kenny always found a way to lose. Garcia,Cooney, Foreman, Shavers etc.

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 10 Oct 2010, 22:27

It's a complete myth Norton 'froze' and thus loses to any big puncher. A peak Foreman would KO most HWs and both Shavers and Cooney, not only two of the biggest punchers ever, also KO'd Norton past his prime (in Gerry's case, WAY past his prime). Norton fought some very hard hitters, took their best, and came right back, his chin wasn't great but it was not close to being glass.

I do favor a peak 1987 Tyson over Norton though, due to the styles clash which would favor Tyson. In 1991, though, I think Tyson had slipped enough to make it a practically 50/50 fight. Norton was certainly a far superior fighter to Ruddock.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 11 Oct 2010, 08:45

Dempsey I agree with you, all things considered, I'd give Norton the edge, but somehow I think lady luck would end up in Tyson's corner.

hhaehre · Post by **hhaehre** » 11 Oct 2010, 16:56

dempseyfire wrote:It's a complete myth Norton 'froze' and thus loses to any big puncher.

How is that a myth when it actually happened? Name me one puncher Norton beat who had even close to the power of Mike Tyson. Norton would be lucky to get out of the first round against Tyson in 91.

John Galt · Post by **John Galt** » 11 Oct 2010, 16:59

Norton would be lucky to get out of the first round with Ruddock too.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 11 Oct 2010, 19:55

hhaehre wrote:
dempseyfire wrote:It's a complete myth Norton 'froze' and thus loses to any big puncher.
How is that a myth when it actually happened? Name me one puncher Norton beat who had even close to the power of Mike Tyson. Norton would be lucky to get out of the first round against Tyson in 91.

Can't argue with this, on paper and simply watching these guys, you'd think Kenny could use his skill to avoid these guys power, but like you say, he never quite managed it. I've always thought he just never got a break in terms of luck. But maybe his style was inherently problematic when faced with top power. Honestly...I don't think so....I think it was in fact bad luck....ok and having a chin that was just short of first class.

SaadOffTheDeck · Post by **SaadOffTheDeck** » 11 Oct 2010, 20:22

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Really, guys --- It's Tyson circa 1991, not 2001. He knocks out Norton.

It's embarrassing how many people mention Cooney in discussing Norton. It's no different than saying Sugar ray Leonard couldn't handle speed because he was destroyed by Norris & Camacho. The man was completely shot, he deserves more respect than that.

Goodnight, Irene · Post by **Goodnight, Irene** » 11 Oct 2010, 23:55

I agree. Amazing how often it's brought up.

hhaehre · Post by **hhaehre** » 12 Oct 2010, 02:36

BoxBuzz wrote:
hhaehre wrote:
dempseyfire wrote:It's a complete myth Norton 'froze' and thus loses to any big puncher.
How is that a myth when it actually happened? Name me one puncher Norton beat who had even close to the power of Mike Tyson. Norton would be lucky to get out of the first round against Tyson in 91.

Can't argue with this, on paper and simply watching these guys, you'd think Kenny could use his skill to avoid these guys power, but like you say, he never quite managed it. I've always thought he just never got a break in terms of luck. But maybe his style was inherently problematic when faced with top power. Honestly...I don't think so....I think it was in fact bad luck....ok and having a chin that was just short of first class.

Well it could have been bad luck of course, we are after all only talking about 4 ko defeats. I think we can disregard the Cooney fight as he was finished by that time. Loosing to an absolute peak Foreman is hardly a shame either so we are left with the Garcia loss and the Shavers loss. Anyhow, I don't think Norton was good enough to beat 91 Tyson whether he could hang with him for a few rounds or not.

Crease · Post by **Crease** » 12 Oct 2010, 06:00

Tyson by KO.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 12 Oct 2010, 08:06

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Really, guys --- It's Tyson circa 1991, not 2001. He knocks out Norton.

Agreed, Tyson wins 9 out of 10 times. Norton caouldn't get out of the way of punches and '91 Tyson still could throw bombs for more than 90 seconds.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 12 Oct 2010, 08:08

John Galt wrote:Norton would be lucky to get out of the first round with Ruddock too.

Yep.

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 12 Oct 2010, 13:27

hhaehre wrote:
BoxBuzz wrote:
hhaehre wrote: How is that a myth when it actually happened? Name me one puncher Norton beat who had even close to the power of Mike Tyson. Norton would be lucky to get out of the first round against Tyson in 91.

Can't argue with this, on paper and simply watching these guys, you'd think Kenny could use his skill to avoid these guys power, but like you say, he never quite managed it. I've always thought he just never got a break in terms of luck. But maybe his style was inherently problematic when faced with top power. Honestly...I don't think so....I think it was in fact bad luck....ok and having a chin that was just short of first class.
Well it could have been bad luck of course, we are after all only talking about 4 ko defeats. I think we can disregard the Cooney fight as he was finished by that time. Loosing to an absolute peak Foreman is hardly a shame either so we are left with the Garcia loss and the Shavers loss. Anyhow, I don't think Norton was good enough to beat 91 Tyson whether he could hang with him for a few rounds or not.

Even in the Shavers fight you have to consider that Norton was 35 years old and fighting possibly the hardest puncher in the history of the sport. So really we are left with the Garcia fight as his only embarrassing loss. He had a good chin and was not easy to hit.

It's not like Tyson knocked everyone out in the first round. Tyson would probably win but it's unlikely that Tyson takes him out in the first round. It would probably go at least a few rounds.