BoxRec

I would say he got the crap knocked out of him. He was supposed to be paralyzed when going against the big punchers. I doubt if Cooney was all that big a puncher, but he looked it against Norton.

Norton's style was very unappealing to me.

yancey wrote:I would say he got the crap knocked out of him. He was supposed to be paralyzed when going against the big punchers. I doubt if Cooney was all that big a puncher, but he looked it against Norton.

Norton's style was very unappealing to me.

He broke Ron Lyle's ribs, busted up Jimmy Young's face and annhilated John "Dino" Dennis.

He was a big puncher. Would have been better if he had a right to go with his left and had more variety on the left hook.

"Beating" fighters who are shot proves nothing.

ebeneezer wrote:

yancey wrote:I would say he got the crap knocked out of him. He was supposed to be paralyzed when going against the big punchers. I doubt if Cooney was all that big a puncher, but he looked it against Norton.

Norton's style was very unappealing to me.

He broke Ron Lyle's ribs, busted up Jimmy Young's face and annhilated John "Dino" Dennis.

He was a big puncher. Would have been better if he had a right to go with his left and had more variety on the left hook.

Okay, I believe you.

I lost interest in boxing for a time beginning around 1980, so I never really studied Cooney all that much.

granberry wrote:"Beating" fighters who are shot proves nothing.

still on the whole "Cooney vs Jimmy Young was a fix" trip are we Granny?

You've been asked several times to prove how it was a fix and explain why, if it was a fix, would Young stand there and allow his face to get horribly multilated instead of taking a count.

Stick to posting pictures of men's backs, there's a good chap.

ebeneezer wrote:

granberry wrote:"Beating" fighters who are shot proves nothing.

still on the whole "Cooney vs Jimmy Young was a fix" trip are we Granny?

You've been asked several times to prove how it was a fix and explain why, if it was a fix, would Young stand there and allow his face to get horribly multilated instead of taking a count.

Stick to posting pictures of men's backs, there's a good chap.

I believe Jimmy Young was thirty two and only a bit past his prime when he fought Cooney...Shouldn't a great "scientific" boxer have made a better showing...

Maybe if George Foreman was George Foreman when he met Jimmy Young he would have been less concerned how he did in round ten then in round one and Young would have been exposed earlier...

Actually, Earnie Shavers exposed him when he walked right through his punches...

ebeneezer wrote:

granberry wrote:"Beating" fighters who are shot proves nothing.

still on the whole "Cooney vs Jimmy Young was a fix" trip are we Granny?

You've been asked several times to prove how it was a fix and explain why, if it was a fix, would Young stand there and allow his face to get horribly multilated instead of taking a count.

Stick to posting pictures of men's backs, there's a good chap.

The collins clones are identifiable by their fixation on homosexuality.

collins just can't hide it.

A very strange type of poster to pollute a supposed "boxing" site.

granberry wrote:

ebeneezer wrote:

granberry wrote:"Beating" fighters who are shot proves nothing.

still on the whole "Cooney vs Jimmy Young was a fix" trip are we Granny?

You've been asked several times to prove how it was a fix and explain why, if it was a fix, would Young stand there and allow his face to get horribly multilated instead of taking a count.

Stick to posting pictures of men's backs, there's a good chap.

The collins clones are identifiable by their fixation on homosexuality.

collins just can't hide it.

A very strange type of poster to pollute a supposed "boxing" site.

Wow...You will set an internet record for ownage...I have never seen a poster get owned as many times as you...

You have to give it Cooney....when he set and punched, he could hit.

ringsider wrote:You have to give it Cooney....when he set and punched, he could hit.

Especially, when the guy is siiting on his can...Those last four punches were gratuitous...

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

ringsider wrote:You have to give it Cooney....when he set and punched, he could hit.

Especially, when the guy is siiting on his can...Those last four punches were gratuitous...

Yep, they were unnecessary.

I loved it when Cooney made a cursory check on Norton's condition after celebrating all over the ring.

yancey wrote:

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

ringsider wrote:You have to give it Cooney....when he set and punched, he could hit.

Especially, when the guy is siiting on his can...Those last four punches were gratuitous...

Yep, they were unnecessary.

I loved it when Cooney made a cursory check on Norton's condition after celebrating all over the ring.

Most boxers not named Mike Tyson and Gerry Cooney would have backed off...

The Cooney-Norton ending, with the unnecessary punching, reminds me of the Johansson-Machen fight.

In that one, Ingo beats on an obviously senseless Machen while an obviously senseless referee allows it to happen.

yancey wrote:The Cooney-Norton ending, with the unnecessary punching, reminds me of the Johansson-Machen fight.

In that one, Ingo beats on an obviously senseless Machen while an obviously senseless referee allows it to happen.

The look on Norton's face was scary and sad ...

If it wasn't momentum that cause those final four punches he's a bully and a chump and I'm glad the Easton Assasin called him "Looney Cooney" and embarrassed him...

..i've always suspected that at one time there was a newspaper ad reading:
WANTED - MIDDLE-AGEDGENTLEMEN OF COLOR TO STAND STILL AND LET A VERY BIG HEAVYWEIGHT HIT YOU IN THE HEAD UNTIL YOU ARE UNCONCSIOUS AND MAYBE A LIITLE AFTER'


CONTACT G.COONEY POST OFFICE BOX KO1

Jaclem wrote:..i've always suspected that at one time there was a newspaper ad reading:
WANTED - MIDDLE-AGEDGENTLEMEN OF COLOR TO STAND STILL AND LET A VERY BIG HEAVYWEIGHT HIT YOU IN THE HEAD UNTIL YOU ARE UNCONCSIOUS AND MAYBE A LIITLE AFTER'


CONTACT G.COONEY POST OFFICE BOX KO1

Styles make fights...Norton could have boxed Larry Holmes and Muhammad Ali one thousand rounds and they wouldn't knock him out yet Foreman, Cooney, and Shavers disposed of him instantaneously...Yes, Norton was past it for Shavers and Cooney but his losses were about more fundamental things...

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

Jaclem wrote:..i've always suspected that at one time there was a newspaper ad reading:
WANTED - MIDDLE-AGEDGENTLEMEN OF COLOR TO STAND STILL AND LET A VERY BIG HEAVYWEIGHT HIT YOU IN THE HEAD UNTIL YOU ARE UNCONCSIOUS AND MAYBE A LIITLE AFTER'


CONTACT G.COONEY POST OFFICE BOX KO1

Styles make fights...Norton could have boxed Larry Holmes and Muhammad Ali one thousand rounds and they wouldn't knock him out yet Foreman, Cooney, and Shavers disposed of him instantaneously...Yes, Norton was past it for Shavers and Cooney but his losses were about more fundamental things...

All true, but I thought his tactics for the Shavers fight were plain stupid, he came out basically looking to counter off the ropes, instead of using his jab and circling. Dumb move...

The Norton-Cooney fight means nothing. Norton was 37 years old. He was way, way past it.

I guess you can make a little bit of an arguement for Shavers. Norton was "only" 35.

He had one last fight when he fought Holmes. That fight took a lot out of him. He was never the same after that.

Norton had a very underrated chin. That he had a glass jaw or something like that is one of those myths that really isn't backed up by much evidence.

He went 15 rounds toe to toe with Larry Holmes. Holmes wasn't a huge puncher but he could hit. Holmes stopped 11 of his next 12 contenders.

Ali wasn't a huge puncher either, but he stopped a lot of people.
Norton didn't seem to have any trouble with Quarry either, who had decent power.

If you look at Norton's prime (1973-1978) the only time that he was ever even knocked down was against Foreman. Norton did get destroyed by Foreman, but Foreman did the same thing to Frazier and almost everyone else that he fought.

Flump wrote:

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:

Jaclem wrote:..i've always suspected that at one time there was a newspaper ad reading:
WANTED - MIDDLE-AGEDGENTLEMEN OF COLOR TO STAND STILL AND LET A VERY BIG HEAVYWEIGHT HIT YOU IN THE HEAD UNTIL YOU ARE UNCONCSIOUS AND MAYBE A LIITLE AFTER'


CONTACT G.COONEY POST OFFICE BOX KO1

Styles make fights...Norton could have boxed Larry Holmes and Muhammad Ali one thousand rounds and they wouldn't knock him out yet Foreman, Cooney, and Shavers disposed of him instantaneously...Yes, Norton was past it for Shavers and Cooney but his losses were about more fundamental things...

All true, but I thought his tactics for the Shavers fight were plain stupid, he came out basically looking to counter off the ropes, instead of using his jab and circling. Dumb move...

He did not fare well against sluggers...

Here's Shavers-Norton:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUWy4FtdpwI

and Foreman-Norton: (with Muhammad Ali doing commentary)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=At8h-yqUPWU

Do you think Norton purposely went to the ropes or Shavers chased him and cornered him there?

Also, people discount the rope a dope that Ali used against Foreman and Frazier but you better have a cast iron mid section and (un)human reflexes...

Ambling Alp wrote:The Norton-Cooney fight means nothing. Norton was 37 years old. He was way, way past it.

I guess you can make a little bit of an arguement for Shavers. Norton was "only" 35.

He had one last fight when he fought Holmes. That fight took a lot out of him. He was never the same after that.

Norton had a very underrated chin. That he had a glass jaw or something like that is one of those myths that really isn't backed up by much evidence.

He went 15 rounds toe to toe with Larry Holmes. Holmes wasn't a huge puncher but he could hit. Holmes stopped 11 of his next 12 contenders.

Ali wasn't a huge puncher either, but he stopped a lot of people.
Norton didn't seem to have any trouble with Quarry either, who had decent power.

If you look at Norton's prime (1973-1978) the only time that he was ever even knocked down was against Foreman. Norton did get destroyed by Foreman, but Foreman did the same thing to Frazier and almost everyone else that he fought.

It's not that Norton wasn't a good fighter as much as it was the irony of going fifty four rounds with two top ten heavyweights like Muhammad Ali and Larry Holmes and only being able to go four rounds with George Foreman, Gerry Cooney, and Earnie Shavers...Then to add to the irony you have Ali knocking out Foreman in eight rounds and decisioning Shavers while absorbing their best punches...All this irony suggests styles do make fights...

Quarry could hit but he wasn't in the same category as Big George and Shavers...Holyfield who fought an old Foreman said Foreman hit him as hard as he has ever been hit and "made his teeth hurt."

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:[quote="Flump

Styles make fights...Norton could have boxed Larry Holmes and Muhammad Ali one thousand rounds and they wouldn't knock him out yet Foreman, Cooney, and Shavers disposed of him instantaneously...Yes, Norton was past it for Shavers and Cooney but his losses were about more fundamental things...

All true, but I thought his tactics for the Shavers fight were plain stupid, he came out basically looking to counter off the ropes, instead of using his jab and circling. Dumb move...[/quote]

He did not fare well against sluggers...

Here's Shavers-Norton:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUWy4FtdpwI

and Foreman-Norton: (with Muhammad Ali doing commentary)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=At8h-yqUPWU

Do you think Norton purposely went to the ropes or Shavers chased him and cornered him there?

Also, people discount the rope a dope that Ali used against Foreman and Frazier but you better have a cast iron mid section and (un)human reflexes...[/quote]

I think he went to the ropes on purpose, he had room to try and snap out his jab and get some space, but he obviously thought he had a better chance countering in close which was stupid. Shavers was always more dangerous when he shortened his punches, from outside they tended to be telegraphed, though of course still devastating if they landed.

Flump wrote:

TheOneIsHere2008 wrote:[quote="Flump

Styles make fights...Norton could have boxed Larry Holmes and Muhammad Ali one thousand rounds and they wouldn't knock him out yet Foreman, Cooney, and Shavers disposed of him instantaneously...Yes, Norton was past it for Shavers and Cooney but his losses were about more fundamental things...

All true, but I thought his tactics for the Shavers fight were plain stupid, he came out basically looking to counter off the ropes, instead of using his jab and circling. Dumb move...

He did not fare well against sluggers...

Here's Shavers-Norton:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUWy4FtdpwI

and Foreman-Norton: (with Muhammad Ali doing commentary)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=At8h-yqUPWU

Do you think Norton purposely went to the ropes or Shavers chased him and cornered him there?

Also, people discount the rope a dope that Ali used against Foreman and Frazier but you better have a cast iron mid section and (un)human reflexes...[/quote]

I think he went to the ropes on purpose, he had room to try and snap out his jab and get some space, but he obviously thought he had a better chance countering in close which was stupid. Shavers was always more dangerous when he shortened his punches, from outside they tended to be telegraphed, though of course still devastating if they landed.[/quote]

When you watch the fight at around the 59 second mark he already caused Norton to buckle a bit...Coselll missed it...

Ambling Alp wrote:
Norton didn't seem to have any trouble with Quarry either, who had decent power.

Quarry took that fight on insanely short notice and was in nowhere near top shape. He was on vacation in Hawaii when he accepted the fight.

Quarry went 10 rounds just a month before the Norton fight. He should have been in shape to fight Norton.

It's pretty obvious that Norton's reflexes weren't what they used to be. He did very little offensively. The big question is would the result have been different if the fight had been a few years earlier? We really don't know. Norton would have been harder to hit. He may also have gotton to Shavers before Shavers could hurt him (like Quarry)
It's also worth pointing out that Norton didn't just down from one shot. Shavers hit him with several good shots before he went down.

Shavers does deserve some credit for his performance. But this isn't nearly as impressive as Foreman knocking out Norton.

The Cooney fight is completely irrelevant. Norton was 37 and had even less left.

This is the problem with Youtube. People watch a couple of minutes of a fighter's career (without knowing the circumstances) and think they have a good idea about that fighter.
You have to know the cirumstances and much more information about a fighter before making strong statements.

If you take a hard look at Norton's career, you can make a legitimate arguement that he had as a good of a chin as Joe Frazier.