BoxRec

Obviously Two Huge Fighters, they never met in the ring (Correct me if i am wrong), but were they ever going to Fight?

Who would have taken it?

This is a good question.

I've always wondered why this fight never happened.

It was a natural fight, considering at one point, they were the only 2 men to have defeated Ali.

Saying that, I think Joe would have crushed Ken in about 2 or 3 rounds.

Ken used to wet himself when he went up against aggressive punchers & there were few more aggressive than Frazier.

As I understand it, they were just too good of friends on a personal level. It was never in the cards.

In a way thats good of them, Shows they dont want anything to Ruin their Friendship. Respect.

Would have been an interesting match up though

It is good that they were and seemingly remain such good friends

but as a boxing fan, it is ashame that they never fought as this would
have been an exciting match.

I feel that Frazier would have won this, but in the years that this mnatch would have happened Frazier was slowing up and on the slide, whereas Norton was still around the best of his game.

Assuming it would have happened 1974-75. I think Frazier wins, but I dont think it would have been as much as a shootout as others do.

Norton did not do well against BIGGER power punchers. Frazier was a hard hitting swarmer who would be blasting the body and up. As opposed to a Foreman who would be throwing boulders down hill at Norton like an unending avanlache.

Would be a good fun fight.

Kym

At first glance, you might think it was strange that they never fought each other. However, Norton wasn't really a top fighter until 1973, and Frazier retired after fighting Foreman the 2nd time in 1976. Norton fought Ali twice in 1973, Foreman in 1974, and Ali again in 1976. Frazier fought Foreman in 1973, Ali in 1974 and 1975, and Foreman in 1976.
If it wasn't for Ali and Foreman, they probably would have fought each other. It would have been the biggest fight out there. As it was, from a practical standpoint, there was little to gain for either with no title on the line.

Norton had a very underrated chin. In his prime (1973-1978), he was never even knocked down by anyone except for Foreman.
It's possible that Frazier could land a left hook right on the button and stop Norton early; It's also possible that Norton could manage to avoid too much punishment and win a decision.
However, those aren't the most likely results.

Frazier often started slowly, so Norton would probably be ahead after the first few rounds. However, Frazier's relentless attack would probably be too much. Frazier would probably win by late stoppage.

Once Ken got through the first couple he was not easy to KO at all. Some guys are susceptible earlier on.

Frazier was a slow starter, and would then build up the pace as time went on, but would tire in middle rounds, only to come back strong late, much like the legendary Jack Dempsey would...in my opinion, if Ken Norton got off first and was able to set the pace...I think Norton would take the early rounds, lost and/or split the middle rounds and the last few rounds would have edged Frazier, closely.

I think Norton gets almost less credit than Frazier does, and in a sense that makes him very under-rated. According to an article in 1980, when Ali was making a comeback against (originally) John Tate, Ali was quoted as saying:

Q: Could Mike Weaver knock you out with a punch like that [referring to Tate's knockout loss to Weaver]?

A: I dont think so. Joe Frazier hits twice as hard. Ken Norton hits much harder. George Foreman hits so much harder. I'm known for taking punches. I'll never get knocked out.

So seems to me Ali admits that Norton was a more dangerous puncher than Joe Frazier...

HomicideHenry wrote:Frazier was a slow starter, and would then build up the pace as time went on, but would tire in middle rounds, only to come back strong late, much like the legendary Jack Dempsey would...in my opinion, if Ken Norton got off first and was able to set the pace...I think Norton would take the early rounds, lost and/or split the middle rounds and the last few rounds would have edged Frazier, closely.

I think Norton gets almost less credit than Frazier does, and in a sense that makes him very under-rated. According to an article in 1980, when Ali was making a comeback against (originally) John Tate, Ali was quoted as saying:

Q: Could Mike Weaver knock you out with a punch like that [referring to Tate's knockout loss to Weaver]?

A: I dont think so. Joe Frazier hits twice as hard. Ken Norton hits much harder. George Foreman hits so much harder. I'm known for taking punches. I'll never get knocked out.

So seems to me Ali admits that Norton was a more dangerous puncher than Joe Frazier...

No, I think he was saying that Norton hit harder than Weaver. And I'm not sure I would agree with that.

I also think that is what Ali meant as well.
Weaver probably probably had better once punch power than Norton, but if you survived it you had a good chance he wasn't that good at capitializing. Norton typically hit guys with more good shots in a fight than Weaver.

I don't agree with the idea that Frazier would tired in the middle rounds, or in the late rounds for the matter. Usually he was great in the middle rounds.
Don't mean to get off track, but how many fights did Dempsey come on strong in the late rounds?

Jack Dempsey did fall short in the middle rounds from time to time when he was up against the great boxers/stylists...against Gibbons, against Tunney, he would fall short in the middle rounds, but then again, Dempsey wasn't below or above chasing an opponent down either, so maybe it isnt so much that he tired or his work rate got less, he just because busier in other respects as his opponents were running away from him.