BoxRec

If Ken Norton had been young enought to compete in the 1980s would he have been a long term belt holder? Could he have kept the challenges of Witherspoon, Thomas, Page, Dokes, Weaver, Tubbs and Coetzee at bay and built up to a rematch/superfight with Holmes?

Quite possibly, depending on the match. I think Cooney would have been trouble for him at any stage but certainly the boxers like Page, Dokes and Tubbs wouldn't have the punch or workrate to keep Norton off. Witherspoon would have been interesting, very similar styles.

You could quite easliy move a lot of 70's heavyweights into the early- mid 80's and see them dominate. The 70's heavies were hungrier, the 80's fighters were being 'managed' by Carl King and having most of their earnings invested in DKP, consequently their stomachs grew and their ambition waned.

Norton was better than any of the guys that were listed (except for Holmes). However if he had to defend a title say 3 times a year, he probably would have slipped up sooner or later and lost to someone. he wasn't as consistent as Holmes.

bump...

Ezzard wrote:If Ken Norton had been young enought to compete in the 1980s would he have been a long term belt holder? Could he have kept the challenges of Witherspoon, Thomas, Page, Dokes, Weaver, Tubbs and Coetzee at bay and built up to a rematch/superfight with Holmes?

Fantastic food for thought. These men like Norton,Foreman,Lyle,Quarry all came along at once..as well as your shavers and Youngs.its a tantalising thought when you think of all these HW giants of the mid 70s and than consider things like what if Tyson had come 10 years earlier.... The Norton of 73/74 competing in 83/84/85 would surely have been ready to be a real strong contender to dethrone Holmes post 83.....Norton could be a little inconsistent but always performed at his best against the very best..... I can see him handling Coetzee, Tubbs ,and Page being at possible risk with Weaver, and the Dokes fight being a real barnburner......rating the 80s guys is very tough too, some of them like Dokes had all the talent in the world on their day, but such was their inconsistency in large part to their out of the ring lifestyles that they could be world beaters one day and taken out early another.

mugabi wrote:

Ezzard wrote:If Ken Norton had been young enought to compete in the 1980s would he have been a long term belt holder? Could he have kept the challenges of Witherspoon, Thomas, Page, Dokes, Weaver, Tubbs and Coetzee at bay and built up to a rematch/superfight with Holmes?

Fantastic food for thought. These men like Norton,Foreman,Lyle,Quarry all came along at once..as well as your shavers and Youngs.its a tantalising thought when you think of all these HW giants of the mid 70s and than consider things like what if Tyson had come 10 years earlier.... The Norton of 73/74 competing in 83/84/85 would surely have been ready to be a real strong contender to dethrone Holmes post 83.....Norton could be a little inconsistent but always performed at his best against the very best..... I can see him handling Coetzee, Tubbs ,and Page being at possible risk with Weaver, and the Dokes fight being a real barnburner......rating the 80s guys is very tough too, some of them like Dokes had all the talent in the world on their day, but such was their inconsistency in large part to their out of the ring lifestyles that they could be world beaters one day and taken out early another.

But realistically couldn't you also see Coetzee landing his right hand and Norton collapsing in a heap? I'm not saying that's the most likely outcome, but certainly Coetzee had the power to trip up Norton.

The Great John L wrote:

mugabi wrote:

Ezzard wrote:If Ken Norton had been young enought to compete in the 1980s would he have been a long term belt holder? Could he have kept the challenges of Witherspoon, Thomas, Page, Dokes, Weaver, Tubbs and Coetzee at bay and built up to a rematch/superfight with Holmes?

Fantastic food for thought. These men like Norton,Foreman,Lyle,Quarry all came along at once..as well as your shavers and Youngs.its a tantalising thought when you think of all these HW giants of the mid 70s and than consider things like what if Tyson had come 10 years earlier.... The Norton of 73/74 competing in 83/84/85 would surely have been ready to be a real strong contender to dethrone Holmes post 83.....Norton could be a little inconsistent but always performed at his best against the very best..... I can see him handling Coetzee, Tubbs ,and Page being at possible risk with Weaver, and the Dokes fight being a real barnburner......rating the 80s guys is very tough too, some of them like Dokes had all the talent in the world on their day, but such was their inconsistency in large part to their out of the ring lifestyles that they could be world beaters one day and taken out early another.

But realistically couldn't you also see Coetzee landing his right hand and Norton collapsing in a heap? I'm not saying that's the most likely outcome, but certainly Coetzee had the power to trip up Norton.

Coatzee had very good power but not in the league of Foreman, Shavers and Cooney. He could wobble Ken and knock him down but Norton's heart and overall durability were very good and Gerrie would have his typical middle rounds stamina meltdown and get knocked out.

It's kind of amazing how much Coatzee had in common with fellow South African Corrie Sanders. Both quick hands, athletic, very quick starters with knockout power. But both had worse stamina than a 17 year old on prom night.

dempseyfire wrote:Coatzee had very good power but not in the league of Foreman, Shavers and Cooney. He could wobble Ken and knock him down but Norton's heart and overall durability were very good and Gerrie would have his typical middle rounds stamina meltdown and get knocked out.

It's kind of amazing how much Coatzee had in common with fellow South African Corrie Sanders. Both quick hands, athletic, very quick starters with knockout power. But both had worse stamina than a 17 year old on prom night.

Norton had a very bad track record of surviving after getting knocked down, and Gerrie hit hard enough to drop him.

The Great John L wrote:

mugabi wrote:

Ezzard wrote:If Ken Norton had been young enought to compete in the 1980s would he have been a long term belt holder? Could he have kept the challenges of Witherspoon, Thomas, Page, Dokes, Weaver, Tubbs and Coetzee at bay and built up to a rematch/superfight with Holmes?

Fantastic food for thought. These men like Norton,Foreman,Lyle,Quarry all came along at once..as well as your shavers and Youngs.its a tantalising thought when you think of all these HW giants of the mid 70s and than consider things like what if Tyson had come 10 years earlier.... The Norton of 73/74 competing in 83/84/85 would surely have been ready to be a real strong contender to dethrone Holmes post 83.....Norton could be a little inconsistent but always performed at his best against the very best..... I can see him handling Coetzee, Tubbs ,and Page being at possible risk with Weaver, and the Dokes fight being a real barnburner......rating the 80s guys is very tough too, some of them like Dokes had all the talent in the world on their day, but such was their inconsistency in large part to their out of the ring lifestyles that they could be world beaters one day and taken out early another.

But realistically couldn't you also see Coetzee landing his right hand and Norton collapsing in a heap? I'm not saying that's the most likely outcome, but certainly Coetzee had the power to trip up Norton.

With the obvious exception of Holmes, Coetzee is actually the only one of the eighties bunch that I would give much of a chance vs. prime Norton. Coetzee was underrated as a boxer and could really crack but he would have to get it done early. I'd make him a live underdog against Norton. The rest of the lost generation would crash and burn, especially light hitting and these days the massively overrated Dokes.

Ezzard wrote:If Ken Norton had been young enought to compete in the 1980s would he have been a long term belt holder? Could he have kept the challenges of Witherspoon, Thomas, Page, Dokes, Weaver, Tubbs and Coetzee at bay and built up to a rematch/superfight with Holmes?

Page could have possibly given Ken some major problems, especially with that right hand of his if he came in shape.

Nile4000 wrote:

Ezzard wrote:If Ken Norton had been young enought to compete in the 1980s would he have been a long term belt holder? Could he have kept the challenges of Witherspoon, Thomas, Page, Dokes, Weaver, Tubbs and Coetzee at bay and built up to a rematch/superfight with Holmes?

Page could have possibly given Ken some major problems, especially with that right hand of his if he came in shape.

You love Page Nile! Greg Page was Muhammad Ali lite and Norton beat the real thing. Page gets worn down and stopped in 9 or 10.

I think Ken Norton vs Tim Witherspoon would've been a fun matchup.

Flump wrote:

Nile4000 wrote:

Ezzard wrote:If Ken Norton had been young enought to compete in the 1980s would he have been a long term belt holder? Could he have kept the challenges of Witherspoon, Thomas, Page, Dokes, Weaver, Tubbs and Coetzee at bay and built up to a rematch/superfight with Holmes?

Page could have possibly given Ken some major problems, especially with that right hand of his if he came in shape.

You love Page Nile! Greg Page was Muhammad Ali lite and Norton beat the real thing. Page gets worn down and stopped in 9 or 10.

Yeah, Flump, for a couple of fights, he was the man.Never fully realized his talent, and then there were other issues afloat.I know Ken probably didn't think too much of him.I could see him outworking Greg, but if Greg had his head and weight together, watch out!

Id pick Witherspoon over Norton prime for prime.