Ken Norton Vs Ron Lyle 1976

Robinson · Post by **Robinson** » 18 Oct 2007, 00:21

How do you guys imagine a fight between these two ?

Say that Lyle manages to stop Young, and he goes on to face Norton in
early 1976.

Who do you think wins and how do you think the fight plays out

Kym

Goodnight, Irene · Post by **Goodnight, Irene** » 18 Oct 2007, 00:58

Looking at his performance in January of that year, Lyle showed tremendous power, hunger & confidence in tackling an out-of-sorts & ring-rusted but still dangerous puncher in Foreman.

He was excellent against a slick --- though ageing --- Ali, in a fight I felt should not have been stopped at the time it was.

Norton isn't going to get blown out here ala vs Foreman or Shavers, though. He was only a little past his best at this point & still had a good handspeed-to-power ratio, but it's his legs that fail him.

He just isn't elusive enough to outbox Lyle & lacks the confidence to trade with him (He commentated on the Foreman-Lyle fight & I'd be surprised if that weren't at the forefront of his mind had they met later that year) & so gets TKO'd, finishing on his feet, but certainly beaten.

Lyle TKO6.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 18 Oct 2007, 07:33

Lyle by KO inside of 3 rounds.

Flump · Post by **Flump** » 18 Oct 2007, 07:38

Norton on points for me in a very tough fight. I can't see Lyle bombing him out and once Norton got warmed up I can see him outworking Big Ron.

tagjohnson · Post by **tagjohnson** » 18 Oct 2007, 11:48

I'm with John L on this one. Ken was one of my all-time favorite fighters but he was 0-3 losing by quickie ko to the three big punchers he faced. There is no reason to believe a fight with Ron would have ended any differently.

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 18 Oct 2007, 12:11

I favor Norton by decision in a very tough matchup, more of rthe reason that Norton had better stamina in 76 and a better defense.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 18 Oct 2007, 12:47

tagjohnson wrote:I'm with John L on this one. Ken was one of my all-time favorite fighters but he was 0-3 losing by quickie ko to the three big punchers he faced. There is no reason to believe a fight with Ron would have ended any differently.

And Lyle was VERY hard puncher. He's the only fighter to ever KD a non-exhausted Foreman, and he did it in spectacular fashion.

I also Like Norton as well, but Lyle would have been a terrible matchup for him.

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 18 Oct 2007, 12:59

Thats pretty much how I see it. Lyle would certainly have a chance for a ko, but most likely Norton would win this. The longer the fight went, the better Norton's chances would be. Norton would probably win by decision, although a late stoppage wouldn't be out of the question.

It never ceases to amaze me that people still hold the Cooney fight as some sort of proof that Norton couldn't take a punch. Norton was way way past it by then. Lyle himself got bombed out by Cooney when he was way past it. Lyle got knocked out by Lynn Ball when he was over the hill. Does anyone hold this against Lyle?

Who else would get criticized for getting knocked out by Earnie Shavers when they are 35 years old? I just don't get it.

I have said this many times before, but I guess it bears repeating: In his prime, (1972-1978) Norton was was never knocked down/or stopped by anyone but George Foreman.

In prime, Norton was very hard to hit and had a good chin. Lyle was easy to hit, and had mediocre stamina. Of course Lyle would have a puncher's chance, but the chances are that Norton wins this.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 18 Oct 2007, 14:43

If Norton got past the first 3 rounds then I see him winning on points, Lyle had the power to ko Ken but Kens extra speed might see him through.... its a very 50-50 fight though, Lyle early or Norton late or on points....

Syntax Error · Post by **Syntax Error** » 18 Oct 2007, 15:40

I'd take Norton to win on points.

Lyle could bang, but I don't believe he possessed the concussive power of a Shavers or a Cooney (2 men who starched an ageing Norton) or Foreman, who starched a younger Norton.

I think someone would have needed that savage, raw power they possessed in order to KO Norton cheaply.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 19 Oct 2007, 07:30

Syntax Error wrote:Lyle could bang, but I don't believe he possessed the concussive power of a Shavers or a Cooney (2 men who starched an ageing Norton) or Foreman, who starched a younger Norton.

Have you seen the Lyle-Foreman fight?

Syntax Error · Post by **Syntax Error** » 19 Oct 2007, 07:59

The Great John L wrote:
Syntax Error wrote:Lyle could bang, but I don't believe he possessed the concussive power of a Shavers or a Cooney (2 men who starched an ageing Norton) or Foreman, who starched a younger Norton.
Have you seen the Lyle-Foreman fight?

Yes, he decked Foreman (who got back up) & then he was KO'ed!

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 19 Oct 2007, 08:14

Syntax Error wrote:
The Great John L wrote:
Syntax Error wrote:Lyle could bang, but I don't believe he possessed the concussive power of a Shavers or a Cooney (2 men who starched an ageing Norton) or Foreman, who starched a younger Norton.
Have you seen the Lyle-Foreman fight?
Yes, he decked Foreman (who got back up) & then he was KO'ed!

Actually, he decked him twice, in spectacular fashion. I just wondered how you came to the conclusion that Lyle’s power wasn’t comparable to Foreman’s. He was the only fighter to floor a non-exhausted Foreman, and in addition to dropping him twice, he also had him hurt on several other occasions. In fact, he generally had slight edge in the majority of the fight and there was little to choose between the two except that Lyle didn’t have quite the recuperative powers of Foreman, possibly due to the age difference.

Not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand your logic. I think Foreman was a better fighter than Lyle, but their size, strength and power were very similar. I think the biggest difference was Lyle’s late start in the game.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 19 Oct 2007, 10:55

The Great John L wrote:
Syntax Error wrote:
The Great John L wrote: Have you seen the Lyle-Foreman fight?
Yes, he decked Foreman (who got back up) & then he was KO'ed!
Actually, he decked him twice, in spectacular fashion. I just wondered how you came to the conclusion that Lyle’s power wasn’t comparable to Foreman’s. He was the only fighter to floor a non-exhausted Foreman, and in addition to dropping him twice, he also had him hurt on several other occasions. In fact, he generally had slight edge in the majority of the fight and there was little to choose between the two except that Lyle didn’t have quite the recuperative powers of Foreman, possibly due to the age difference.

Not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand your logic. I think Foreman was a better fighter than Lyle, but their size, strength and power were very similar. I think the biggest difference was Lyle’s late start in the game.

Lyles biggest drawback was that he was a bit ponderous, I'm not sure but I think Foreman landed more punches on Lyle in their fight and this is what probably took its toll in the end. Remember Lyle was still on his feet in the end but pinned in the corner.... Lyle couldnt get off quick enough to stop Foreman.....

Flump · Post by **Flump** » 19 Oct 2007, 12:03

silkov wrote:
The Great John L wrote:
Syntax Error wrote: Yes, he decked Foreman (who got back up) & then he was KO'ed!
Actually, he decked him twice, in spectacular fashion. I just wondered how you came to the conclusion that Lyle’s power wasn’t comparable to Foreman’s. He was the only fighter to floor a non-exhausted Foreman, and in addition to dropping him twice, he also had him hurt on several other occasions. In fact, he generally had slight edge in the majority of the fight and there was little to choose between the two except that Lyle didn’t have quite the recuperative powers of Foreman, possibly due to the age difference.

Not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand your logic. I think Foreman was a better fighter than Lyle, but their size, strength and power were very similar. I think the biggest difference was Lyle’s late start in the game.
Lyles biggest drawback was that he was a bit ponderous, I'm not sure but I think Foreman landed more punches on Lyle in their fight and this is what probably took its toll in the end. Remember Lyle was still on his feet in the end but pinned in the corner.... Lyle couldnt get off quick enough to stop Foreman.....

Not related to his power but Lyle did have a habit of turning into a stationary punching bag when hurt (Ali,Cooney,Foreman), as did Shavers (Lyle,Ali, Holmes). Not sure what that's got to do with the price of fish but I thought I'd say it anyway..

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 19 Oct 2007, 12:09

Flump wrote:
silkov wrote:
The Great John L wrote: Actually, he decked him twice, in spectacular fashion. I just wondered how you came to the conclusion that Lyle’s power wasn’t comparable to Foreman’s. He was the only fighter to floor a non-exhausted Foreman, and in addition to dropping him twice, he also had him hurt on several other occasions. In fact, he generally had slight edge in the majority of the fight and there was little to choose between the two except that Lyle didn’t have quite the recuperative powers of Foreman, possibly due to the age difference.

Not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand your logic. I think Foreman was a better fighter than Lyle, but their size, strength and power were very similar. I think the biggest difference was Lyle’s late start in the game.
Lyles biggest drawback was that he was a bit ponderous, I'm not sure but I think Foreman landed more punches on Lyle in their fight and this is what probably took its toll in the end. Remember Lyle was still on his feet in the end but pinned in the corner.... Lyle couldnt get off quick enough to stop Foreman.....
Not related to his power but Lyle did have a habit of turning into a stationary punching bag when hurt (Ali,Cooney,Foreman), as did Shavers (Lyle,Ali, Holmes). Not sure what that's got to do with the price of fish but I thought I'd say it anyway..

I think its due to being so heavily musceled, Mike Weaver and Frank Bruno were also like this.... look at Weavers losses to Holmes, Dokes and Smith and Brunos to Witherspoon, Smith, Tyson and Lewis....

Syntax Error · Post by **Syntax Error** » 19 Oct 2007, 12:52

The Great John L wrote:
Syntax Error wrote:
The Great John L wrote: Have you seen the Lyle-Foreman fight?
Yes, he decked Foreman (who got back up) & then he was KO'ed!
Actually, he decked him twice, in spectacular fashion. I just wondered how you came to the conclusion that Lyle’s power wasn’t comparable to Foreman’s. He was the only fighter to floor a non-exhausted Foreman, and in addition to dropping him twice, he also had him hurt on several other occasions. In fact, he generally had slight edge in the majority of the fight and there was little to choose between the two except that Lyle didn’t have quite the recuperative powers of Foreman, possibly due to the age difference.

Not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand your logic. I think Foreman was a better fighter than Lyle, but their size, strength and power were very similar. I think the biggest difference was Lyle’s late start in the game.

Ron Lyle was similar to Frank Bruno; yes he could punch no doubt, but due to his ponderous nature, it led to him being not quite as effective against the better opposition.

For this reason, I do not rate Lyle with the likes of Foreman et al for power.

That's the logic I was thinking of, in a proposed 1976 fight with Ken Norton.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 19 Oct 2007, 13:16

Syntax Error wrote:
The Great John L wrote:
Syntax Error wrote: Yes, he decked Foreman (who got back up) & then he was KO'ed!
Actually, he decked him twice, in spectacular fashion. I just wondered how you came to the conclusion that Lyle’s power wasn’t comparable to Foreman’s. He was the only fighter to floor a non-exhausted Foreman, and in addition to dropping him twice, he also had him hurt on several other occasions. In fact, he generally had slight edge in the majority of the fight and there was little to choose between the two except that Lyle didn’t have quite the recuperative powers of Foreman, possibly due to the age difference.

Not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand your logic. I think Foreman was a better fighter than Lyle, but their size, strength and power were very similar. I think the biggest difference was Lyle’s late start in the game.
Ron Lyle was similar to Frank Bruno; yes he could punch no doubt, but due to his ponderous nature, it led to him being not quite as effective against the better opposition.

For this reason, I do not rate Lyle with the likes of Foreman et al for power.

That's the logic I was thinking of, in a proposed 1976 fight with Ken Norton.

For pure power Lyle was probably not far away from Foreman and Shavers, but he was a tad slower at getting off.... he was also an underrated boxer and boxed rather than slugged it out in a lot of his fights....

Syntax Error · Post by **Syntax Error** » 19 Oct 2007, 14:51

silkov wrote:
Syntax Error wrote:
The Great John L wrote: Actually, he decked him twice, in spectacular fashion. I just wondered how you came to the conclusion that Lyle’s power wasn’t comparable to Foreman’s. He was the only fighter to floor a non-exhausted Foreman, and in addition to dropping him twice, he also had him hurt on several other occasions. In fact, he generally had slight edge in the majority of the fight and there was little to choose between the two except that Lyle didn’t have quite the recuperative powers of Foreman, possibly due to the age difference.

Not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand your logic. I think Foreman was a better fighter than Lyle, but their size, strength and power were very similar. I think the biggest difference was Lyle’s late start in the game.
Ron Lyle was similar to Frank Bruno; yes he could punch no doubt, but due to his ponderous nature, it led to him being not quite as effective against the better opposition.

For this reason, I do not rate Lyle with the likes of Foreman et al for power.

That's the logic I was thinking of, in a proposed 1976 fight with Ken Norton.
For pure power Lyle was probably not far away from Foreman and Shavers, but he was a tad slower at getting off.... he was also an underrated boxer and boxed rather than slugged it out in a lot of his fights....

That's a good point, he did like to box a bit & that's another reason why I'm inclined to favour Norton.

Ken had an awkward style & unless you could blast him out, when he got warmed up, he could be difficult to beat (just ask Larry Holmes & Muhammad Ali :P ).

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 19 Oct 2007, 14:59

Syntax Error wrote:
silkov wrote:
Syntax Error wrote: Ron Lyle was similar to Frank Bruno; yes he could punch no doubt, but due to his ponderous nature, it led to him being not quite as effective against the better opposition.

For this reason, I do not rate Lyle with the likes of Foreman et al for power.

That's the logic I was thinking of, in a proposed 1976 fight with Ken Norton.
For pure power Lyle was probably not far away from Foreman and Shavers, but he was a tad slower at getting off.... he was also an underrated boxer and boxed rather than slugged it out in a lot of his fights....
That's a good point, he did like to box a bit & that's another reason why I'm inclined to favour Norton.

Ken had an awkward style & unless you could blast him out, when he got warmed up, he could be difficult to beat (just ask Larry Holmes & Muhammad Ali :P ).

Yeah, in this fight a lot would depend on whether Lyly came out slugging or boxing.... he'd probably have a chance of taking Norton out early if he started fast, but over the distance he would most likely be outpointed... but it would be a tough fight either way.....
I was reading a book profiling fighters trainers a while back and a guy (I cant remember his name) who trained Norton for a bit (not Futch) said that Ken was always a little wary of big punchers and did better against boxers like Ali and Holmes.... one of the reasons for this was that Nortons style meant that he couldnt fight going backwards, so when under pressure from a big puncher he could crumble....

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 19 Oct 2007, 16:43

silkov wrote:
Syntax Error wrote:
silkov wrote: For pure power Lyle was probably not far away from Foreman and Shavers, but he was a tad slower at getting off.... he was also an underrated boxer and boxed rather than slugged it out in a lot of his fights....
That's a good point, he did like to box a bit & that's another reason why I'm inclined to favour Norton.

Ken had an awkward style & unless you could blast him out, when he got warmed up, he could be difficult to beat (just ask Larry Holmes & Muhammad Ali :P ).
Yeah, in this fight a lot would depend on whether Lyly came out slugging or boxing.... he'd probably have a chance of taking Norton out early if he started fast, but over the distance he would most likely be outpointed... but it would be a tough fight either way.....
I was reading a book profiling fighters trainers a while back and a guy (I cant remember his name) who trained Norton for a bit (not Futch) said that Ken was always a little wary of big punchers and did better against boxers like Ali and Holmes.... one of the reasons for this was that Nortons style meant that he couldnt fight going backwards, so when under pressure from a big puncher he could crumble....

That was Futch. However the evidence speaks to the contrary. Norton faced Futch trained puncher Bobick, who was undefeated and pretty well regarded at the time, and was so 'wary' he destroyed Bobick in under 3 minutes.

Robinson · Post by **Robinson** » 19 Oct 2007, 21:52

I think I agree with most people here in assuming that if Lyle was to win this it would be early on. However, it seems to me that Norton, fared better against 'boxer' types and guys who were not bigger or stronger than him..generally speaking. I think he seriously had problems with power punchers, at any stage of his carrer.

Lyle seems to be some what ponderous, and like Norton awkward at times, just unlike Ken though, his awkardness isn't a benefit.

Norton to me isn't that active a puncher, which I think can be some what dangerous agaisnt a guy like Lyle.

Id love to see this fight however the out come.

Kym

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 20 Oct 2007, 10:33

dempseyfire wrote:
silkov wrote:
Syntax Error wrote: That's a good point, he did like to box a bit & that's another reason why I'm inclined to favour Norton.

Ken had an awkward style & unless you could blast him out, when he got warmed up, he could be difficult to beat (just ask Larry Holmes & Muhammad Ali :P ).
Yeah, in this fight a lot would depend on whether Lyly came out slugging or boxing.... he'd probably have a chance of taking Norton out early if he started fast, but over the distance he would most likely be outpointed... but it would be a tough fight either way.....
I was reading a book profiling fighters trainers a while back and a guy (I cant remember his name) who trained Norton for a bit (not Futch) said that Ken was always a little wary of big punchers and did better against boxers like Ali and Holmes.... one of the reasons for this was that Nortons style meant that he couldnt fight going backwards, so when under pressure from a big puncher he could crumble....
That was Futch. However the evidence speaks to the contrary. Norton faced Futch trained puncher Bobick, who was undefeated and pretty well regarded at the time, and was so 'wary' he destroyed Bobick in under 3 minutes.

Oh come on, Bobick was hardly in the class of Shavers and Lyle when it came to punch power!... 8). And it wasnt Futch who said it, there was someone else who trained Norton who said it, Bill something, I think... I will have to look it up sometime....

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 20 Oct 2007, 12:13

silkov wrote:
dempseyfire wrote:
silkov wrote: Yeah, in this fight a lot would depend on whether Lyly came out slugging or boxing.... he'd probably have a chance of taking Norton out early if he started fast, but over the distance he would most likely be outpointed... but it would be a tough fight either way.....
I was reading a book profiling fighters trainers a while back and a guy (I cant remember his name) who trained Norton for a bit (not Futch) said that Ken was always a little wary of big punchers and did better against boxers like Ali and Holmes.... one of the reasons for this was that Nortons style meant that he couldnt fight going backwards, so when under pressure from a big puncher he could crumble....
That was Futch. However the evidence speaks to the contrary. Norton faced Futch trained puncher Bobick, who was undefeated and pretty well regarded at the time, and was so 'wary' he destroyed Bobick in under 3 minutes.
Oh come on, Bobick was hardly in the class of Shavers and Lyle when it came to punch power!... 8). And it wasnt Futch who said it, there was someone else who trained Norton who said it, Bill something, I think... I will have to look it up sometime....

It was Futch.

I'm not saying Bobick is on the level of Lyle as an overall boxer, but his punching power was in that league. Bobick was a very hard puncher.

joe kurtz · Post by **joe kurtz** » 20 Oct 2007, 12:43

Good work Kym, I love this one as well.

Me? I'm going with Norton via W12 or perhaps even a latter round TKO.

Though Lyle was ,indeed, the sort of big puncher that could trouble Kenny, I just don't see him as the quick starter & lethal finisher than Foreman, Shavers & Cooney were. One needs only to look at his record to see that.

IMO Lyle was just a shade below the class of the Alis, Foremans, Fraziers, Nortons & Youngs of that elite class of the '70s. Though of that lot, I actually believe that he matched up best with Frazier. But, more on that later ...

For pure power, I think Lyle rated just below Foreman & Shavers, but as others said before me, he could be rather ponderous at times which didn't allow him to get his shots off in as destructive a manner. Evidenced by his having to go to decisions with Jimmy Ellis, Quarry, Larry Middleton twice ( after having previously stopped him in 3 ), Goyo Peralta twice, Scott Ledoux & others.

I think Norton could've & would've controlled this one with his underrated jab.

...........................

Now back to the barn burner that would've been Frazier - Lyle. This one has war written all over it.

Styles make fights & this one would've been brutal for both men. With Frazier running into some of the same problems that he had against Foreman, but with Lyle not having the poleaxe jab nor the same aforementioned finishing ability as George.

But, Lyle was definitely big, strong & mean like Foreman & was a bigger hitter than Oscar Bonavena who troubled Smokin' Joe so much for 25 rounds. I go out on a limb on this one & go with Ron Lyle in an upset via TKO8.

Anyone else?