Tommy Morrisson v. Ken Norton

[Vladimir5555]

What happens?

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Norton stops him in 5 or 6 rounds.

[Vladimir5555]

Or Morrisson stops Norton in 1-2 rounds,or Norton stops Morrisson in 5-7 rounds.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Or Morrisson stops Norton in 1-2 rounds

That's highly improbable.

[The Great John L]

Norton was a much better fighter, but Morrison could definitely crack and despite the current revisionist trend Norton was susceptible to punchers. Of course so was Morrison but he did display the ability to get up from KDs and win against good punchers several times. I'll go with the upset and take Morrison by stoppage inside of 5 in a good slugfest.

[TheWigwam]

Norton, no doubt

[Bricks]

I think this is one of those nights for Norton when the fast hard punching Morrison catches him early around round 3

[dempseyfire]

I wouldn't be surprised to see Morrison taken out in a round.

[The Great John L]

I wouldn't be surprised to see Morrison taken out in a round.

Me either. Or Norton taken out in a round.

[elmersalsa]

another MISMATCH. Can you post better matches? Everybody knows in here that Tommy Morrison is not in Ken Norton's class.

[Vladimir5555]

Norton much better boxer than Cooney and Shavers.

But this guys knock him out in first round...))

[The Great John L]

Norton much better boxer than Cooney and Shavers.

But this guys knock him out in first round...))

Queue Norton apologists.

[Ambling Alp II]

Come on. Norton was 35 when he fought Shavers and 37 when he fought Cooney.

[The Great John L]

Come on. Norton was 35 when he fought Shavers and 37 when he fought Cooney.

Come on, do you really think it would have mattered against Shavers? Norton was not the best at avoiding punches and didn't have the sturdiest of chins either. A few years earlier he might have made it to the second or third round against Shavers, but that's about it.

Cooney might have been another story, but he also could crack and would have been a tough one for a prime Norton. It would have just been a matter of which landed a solid shot first. I would guess Norton becuase he had more experience against quality opponents, but it would have been a dangerous fight for him.

[Ambling Alp II]

I think that it might have mattered with Shavers; almost anything could happen with Shavers with a good opponent. Norton may have got hurt, but weathered the storm. He may have also nailed Shavers early before Shavers nailed him and stopped him. I think a prime Norton vs a prime Shavers fight would be a 50-50 situation.

I think it probably would have made the difference with Cooney. Cooney would have had a puncher's chance, but that is about it. I think a prime Norton would win at least 80% of the time vs a prime Cooney.

[The Great John L]

I think that it might have mattered with Shavers; almost anything could happen with Shavers with a good opponent. Norton may have got hurt, but weathered the storm. He may have also nailed Shavers early before Shavers nailed him and stopped him. I think a prime Norton vs a prime Shavers fight would be a 50-50 situation.

I think it probably would have made the difference with Cooney. Cooney would have had a puncher's chance, but that is about it. I think a prime Norton would win at least 80% of the time vs a prime Cooney.

When did Norton ever weather the storm? Besides the Quarry fight when he got hit with about 50 solid power shots before he got stopped, Shavers actually showed a good chin throughout his career. Everybody always looks at his stoppage losses without actually knowing anything about the fights themselves. As noted, besides the Quarry fight and Simms fight late in his career, every time he went down he was exhausted. Norton didn't have the power stop Shavers early. Even Ron Lyle couldn't do that. He didn't do much of anything until Shavers had shot his wad and had nothing left in the tank. If Norton somehow completely changed his colors and became Jimmy Young or Larry Holmes he would have had a chance, but Norton didn't fight that way.

Why does everyone so easily say that no version of Joe Frazier would have had a chance against Foreman, and yet the same people seem to be quick to dream up ways for Norton to somehow become a slick defensive fighter with a solid chin? Norton never showed an ability to adapt in a fight, and always seemed to fold up against the few bigh punchers he faced in his career?

This is not a knock on Norton, who was a fine fighter, and I would rate as "better" fighter than Shavers. Shavers was a huge puncher with decent skills, and Norton was pretty easy to hit and had a rather pedestrian chin. Just about as bad a matchup as possible for Kenny.

[raylawpc]

Let's be realistic: The fight with Larry Holmes really took most of the gas Kenny had left in his tank. It was his last great effort and (even though I thought he edged Holmes), he wasn't the same fighter after that. I think it's fair to say that after the Holmes fight, everybody he met was facing a Ken Norton who probably should have hung it up after losing to Larry.

Before that, the guy was stopped only twice - by Garcia and Foreman. No disgrace being stopped by Foreman. Most were. And by all accounts, Norton went into the Garcia fight overconfident and underprepared. Nobody else stopped Ken; in fact, I don't even remember him being down in any other fights. And, I don't really remember anybody questioning Norton's chin until after the Holmes fight and he was clearly past it. I think Ken gets an unfair rap based on past-his-prime efforts. He was no heavyweight version of Billy Graham maybe, but he had a good chin, I think.

[Ambling Alp II]

That is pretty much how I see it as well.
In regard to some of Great John L's points:
Norton always folded up against the big punchers-He only "folded up" once during his prime. That was against George Foreman. You could say the same thing about Joe Frazier. Frazier is actually a year younger than Norton. If Frazier would have fought Shavers in 1979, and Cooney in 1981, he would have been massacred as well. However, no one really questions Frazier's chin like they do Norton's.

Norton wasn't a good defensive fighter and didn't have a good chin? I guess I have to disagree. He didn't have a great chin or a great defense. However, I think he had a good defense and a good chin. He fought a lot of decent punchers from 1972-1978-Clark, Kirkman, Middleton, Bobick, Holmes, Quarry, and of course Ali 3 times. He never got knocked down once outside of Foreman.

Of course Shavers is a different animal. However, at times Shavers hurt an opponent but didn't put him away. If Shavers hurts Norton early in the round, maybe he puts him away. However, if it's late in the round, Norton maybe survives.

Obviously Shavers has the advantage in power. However, Norton was better defensively. I would argue that Norton had a better chin. If you watch their fights against common opponents, (Ali,Holmes, Quarry) it looks like Norton took their shots better than Shavers.

Really outside of a Shavers points victory, almost anything could happen in this fight. Either man could stop the other early, in the middle of the fight, or late in the fight. One guy might get hurt/knocked down, and come back to win.

[dempseyfire]

I think that it might have mattered with Shavers; almost anything could happen with Shavers with a good opponent. Norton may have got hurt, but weathered the storm. He may have also nailed Shavers early before Shavers nailed him and stopped him. I think a prime Norton vs a prime Shavers fight would be a 50-50 situation.

I think it probably would have made the difference with Cooney. Cooney would have had a puncher's chance, but that is about it. I think a prime Norton would win at least 80% of the time vs a prime Cooney.

When did Norton ever weather the storm? Besides the Quarry fight when he got hit with about 50 solid power shots before he got stopped, Shavers actually showed a good chin throughout his career. Everybody always looks at his stoppage losses without actually knowing anything about the fights themselves. As noted, besides the Quarry fight and Simms fight late in his career, every time he went down he was exhausted. Norton didn't have the power stop Shavers early. Even Ron Lyle couldn't do that. He didn't do much of anything until Shavers had shot his wad and had nothing left in the tank. If Norton somehow completely changed his colors and became Jimmy Young or Larry Holmes he would have had a chance, but Norton didn't fight that way.

Why does everyone so easily say that no version of Joe Frazier would have had a chance against Foreman, and yet the same people seem to be quick to dream up ways for Norton to somehow become a slick defensive fighter with a solid chin? Norton never showed an ability to adapt in a fight, and always seemed to fold up against the few bigh punchers he faced in his career?

This is not a knock on Norton, who was a fine fighter, and I would rate as "better" fighter than Shavers. Shavers was a huge puncher with decent skills, and Norton was pretty easy to hit and had a rather pedestrian chin. Just about as bad a matchup as possible for Kenny.

Norton took tons of big shots from respectable punchers like Garcia (rematch), O'Halloran, LeDoux, Holmes (had power in his right hand), Lovell, even Ali who had under-rated power; Norton was never as hurt in his 3 fights with Ali as Frazier was but somehow Norton has the glass chin and Frazier is Mr. Durable (for the record I think both had very good chins with Frazier having the edge but the point remains)

Just 4 stoppage losses in a 50 fight career vs very high level competition speaks to a glass jaw? Yeah right . . .

Morrison is out of his class here. A guy who barely gets by Joe Hipp and Terry Anderson ain't surviving vs Norton, who would jab the crap out of him before laying the boom down.