Ken Norton wasn't really that good

[Chopping Right]

I've been thinking this for a long time now, Ken Norton wasn't really as good as his IBHOF place suggests. He had an awkward style that was particularly effective at negating Muhammad Ali and Ali had more problems with him than anyone else, but a lot of other guys had no problems at all. Foreman, Shavers and Cooney destroyed him in a matter of minutes and his only significant wins outside of the first Ali fight was a KO of Jerry Quarry and a split decision over Jimmy Young. Granted he took Holmes and Ali close but it seems his "greatness" is really based on having a style that Ali had trouble with.

Just my 10 cents worth.

[revporl]

I reckon his problem was that although his fighting style was very effective, his chin let him down. Hence being blown out by the likes of Foreman and Cooney, while putting up fantastic displayes against boxers like Ali and Holmes.

[dempseyfire]

I've been thinking this for a long time now, Ken Norton wasn't really as good as his IBHOF place suggests. He had an awkward style that was particularly effective at negating Muhammad Ali and Ali had more problems with him than anyone else, but a lot of other guys had no problems at all. Foreman, Shavers and Cooney destroyed him in a matter of minutes and his only significant wins outside of the first Ali fight was a KO of Jerry Quarry and a split decision over Jimmy Young. Granted he took Holmes and Ali close but it seems his "greatness" is really based on having a style that Ali had trouble with.

Just my 10 cents worth.

Just watch him vs Ali, Holmes, or Quarry. The guy was a very talented HW, in superd conditioning wit great stamina, very good power, fast, hard jab, very quick reflexes. His chin wasn't great nut not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. Holmes wasn't a power puncher but he could wack and he hit Norton with everything but the kitchen sink and still came on. Other punchers like Quarry and Kirkman hit Norton with good shots and Ken kept coming. When he was green (he started boxing at a late age) he was stopped by top ten Garcia. In his prime the only person to beat him decisively (and KO him) was a prime of his life George Foreman, nothing to be ashamed about. Past his prime, disenchanted with boxing, he got KO'd by Shavers, again one of the hardest punchers ever who could knock out anybody. The Cooney fight shouldn't even factor in b-c Norton was a ghost shell of his former self and just set up as a name for the emerging white hope.

Perhaps over-rated by some but nowadays under-rated by many.

[Slapsie Maxie]

mid to lower top 10 in the 70's

which makes him

Top 5 in the 80's

Top 5 in the 90's

And a God in the current scene

S

[Chopping Right]

I've been thinking this for a long time now, Ken Norton wasn't really as good as his IBHOF place suggests. He had an awkward style that was particularly effective at negating Muhammad Ali and Ali had more problems with him than anyone else, but a lot of other guys had no problems at all. Foreman, Shavers and Cooney destroyed him in a matter of minutes and his only significant wins outside of the first Ali fight was a KO of Jerry Quarry and a split decision over Jimmy Young. Granted he took Holmes and Ali close but it seems his "greatness" is really based on having a style that Ali had trouble with.

Just my 10 cents worth.

Just watch him vs Ali, Holmes, or Quarry. The guy was a very talented HW, in superd conditioning wit great stamina, very good power, fast, hard jab, very quick reflexes. His chin wasn't great nut not nearly as bad as people make it out to be. Holmes wasn't a power puncher but he could wack and he hit Norton with everything but the kitchen sink and still came on. Other punchers like Quarry and Kirkman hit Norton with good shots and Ken kept coming. When he was green (he started boxing at a late age) he was stopped by top ten Garcia. In his prime the only person to beat him decisively (and KO him) was a prime of his life George Foreman, nothing to be ashamed about. Past his prime, disenchanted with boxing, he got KO'd by Shavers, again one of the hardest punchers ever who could knock out anybody. The Cooney fight shouldn't even factor in b-c Norton was a ghost shell of his former self and just set up as a name for the emerging white hope.

Perhaps over-rated by some but nowadays under-rated by many.

Yeah, I agree with a lot of those points. I do feel Norton was an good heavyweight, perhaps my point is that his Hall of Fame place seems to have been secured on his style causing the great Ali such problems more than anything else.

[KOJOE90]

I believe that Norton put the Garcia lose down to poor stamina at the time. I have never seen the fight myself though.

[silkov]

If you don't want to credit Norton for his performances vs Ali why criticise him for his losses to Foreman, Shavers, Cooney etc.
Truth is Norton was a very good heavy who would have beaten many of the champs both before and after him. In losing to Foreman and Shavers Kenny lost to two of the biggest punchers in Heavyweight history... can't hold that against him!. Against Cooney Ken was shot so really it shouldn't count as a career defining fight.
Nortons performances against a near peak Ali and also a peaking Larry Holmes should ensure by themselves a place for him in the amongst the best heavies of all time... certainly above Lennox Lewis, Tyson, and Holifield imo.

[LightCruiser]

Ken never fought "smokin" Joe Frazier, I think they were good buddies, but what would have been the outcome ?

[chance]

Norton was average. He gave Ali problems because Ali almost exclusively moved left, fought tall, and bailed out when he jabbed. Norton kept his weight back, had a good right hand, and cut the ring off to his right. Norton really didn't have great speed, skills, or devastating power. His chin may have been questionable as well, but because Ali wasn't a devastating puncher that really didn't matter. I know I'm gonna catch hell for this, but the reason he gave Ali problems, was that Ali was limited by poor fundamentals. He got by on supurb natural talent, and by fighting overratted competition. Honestly, a pro fighter should be able to throw punches moving all four directions. The fact that Ali had trouble with norton may say more against Ali than it does for Norton.

[Chopping Right]

I've noticed you do get a more reasoned discussion on the "Boxers of the past" threads.

Anyway back to the point in hand. I do accept the Cooney fight should not be held against Norton, Ken was nearly 38 and should not have been fighting really. However I still feel that close fights with Holmes and Ali do not warrant IBHOF recognition, a good fighter he was, but a Hall of Famer?

[overhand_right]

Hes HOF because he was a strong consistent entertaining fighter from a great era so people remember him fondly.

I see your point though bud.

[meade95]

Well the Cooney fight can't be held against Norton at all - He was way past his prime by then -

And the fact is, Norton definitely got jobbed (stolen!) in one of his losses to Ali and actually probably in both his losses (therefore Ali should have two more losses on his record and how would that tarnish his overall HW ranking??)

Same holds for the Holmes fight - Many felt Norton won that as well -

[overhand_right]

Ali beat Norton in their second fight fair & square. Even Kenny doesnt say he won that one.

Deal with it.

[Syntax Error]

I've been thinking this for a long time now, Ken Norton wasn't really as good as his IBHOF place suggests. He had an awkward style that was particularly effective at negating Muhammad Ali and Ali had more problems with him than anyone else, but a lot of other guys had no problems at all. Foreman, Shavers and Cooney destroyed him in a matter of minutes and his only significant wins outside of the first Ali fight was a KO of Jerry Quarry and a split decision over Jimmy Young. Granted he took Holmes and Ali close but it seems his "greatness" is really based on having a style that Ali had trouble with.

Just my 10 cents worth.

Good point. He does seem to live off the back of Ali & the fact that he was Ali's toughest foe.

[tiredoldngrey]

I don't believe Norton belongs in the HoF, unless some one can convince me that being 4-7-1 (KO'd 4 times, 3 in the first) against top ten foes deserves recognition! There is lots of that with those associated with Ali; Frazier was a mere 10-4 (ko'd thrice) against the top ten of his era; Liston 8-4 (also ko'd thrice); Patterson was only 13-7-1 (ko'd 5 times, also down more than any other HW champ). It seems to me that one boxer's greatness is proven by the number of HofFer's he fought; they, meanwhile, are in the HoF because they fought him.

[Marciano Frazier]

I believe that Norton put the Garcia lose down to poor stamina at the time. I have never seen the fight myself though.

Norton was dropped in the first round against Garcia, so I don't see how that loss was due to poor stamina. However, he improved after that and blew Garcia away in a rematch. What he did against Ali and Holmes is excellent, and he also had wins over top contenders Quarry and Young. The loss to Foreman is no shame. Frazier was blown out in two by Big George as well. Norton was also a little over the hill when he was blown out by Shavers, and the Cooney loss came when he was completely shot.
I think Norton was a semi-great heavyweight, and probably ranks among the top 30 of all time.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

My opinon on NOrton is he was a very good heavyweight but not tops all time. He showed by beating a out of his prime but still good ali and by nearly beating larry holmes in a close fight. He was the type of fighter that always did well with boxers bvut bad agaisnt sluggers and thats why foreman, cooney and shavers all knocked him out. Norton did better against guys that were boxers who moved back or side to side and he had toruble wit hthe punchers who came in on him. Thats why he would do very well against guys liek holmes, charles, walcott, ali, tunney, and jack johnson. I think he would have enormous toruble and may be knocked out by guys like foreman, liston, shavers, mike tyson, the rock, bowe, dempsey, jeffries. NOrton had trouble with big punchers. He was a very strong guy and deserves to be recognized as a good fighter but not a top 20 heavyweight of all time.

[dempseyfire]

I think Norton did enough to be a top 20 HW. Beat a still capable Ali twice, had a great 15 rd war with Holmes, perserved in a war with Jerry Quarry (Quarry was past his best, but Jerry a hard puncher landed clean on Ken and Norton came back, showing his chin was not glass like some claim), and beat a streaking Jimmy Young. They showed his fight with Quarry on Classic this weekend and man is he getting under-rated by some people. Very fast, beautiful combination puncher, sharp jab . . .he would be champ EASY today.