Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
It was a "baiting " thread.
Ken Norton wasn't Joe Louis but he's a top 25 heavyweight.
Ken Norton wasn't Joe Louis but he's a top 25 heavyweight.
-
Collins2000
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 4175
- Joined: 06 May 2002, 06:13
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
Be that as it may, it doesn't mean a so-called moderator with a holier-than-thou complex, should be starting the baiting.ThatOne wrote:It was a "baiting " thread.
Seems rather strange behaviour when his boss, Shep, claims he wants to clean this place up.
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
I am pleased with the results.
I enjoyed Ken Norton.
And a nice guy too.
I enjoyed Ken Norton.
And a nice guy too.
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
Collins, I just disagree. And doubt that I can be persueded differently.
My humor is what it is. Sorry that you interpret it thusly. I certainly did not mean to bait you, or anyone else. I suppose sometimes a person's mere presence can be considered such.
As for the legitimate issue a hand, it does appear to be rather one sided in terms of collective opinion.
However, Just so it's not considered such, I have retracted my comment.
My humor is what it is. Sorry that you interpret it thusly. I certainly did not mean to bait you, or anyone else. I suppose sometimes a person's mere presence can be considered such.
As for the legitimate issue a hand, it does appear to be rather one sided in terms of collective opinion.
However, Just so it's not considered such, I have retracted my comment.
-
Collins2000
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 4175
- Joined: 06 May 2002, 06:13
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
Smart move, mate.BoxBuzz wrote: However, Just so it's not considered such, I have retracted my comment.
I shouldn't have to be here to keep you honest, though.
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
Not a bum, but surely not an all time great...Imho
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
how can anyone say he was a bum?
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
If someone were to respond to this by sayingCollins2000 wrote:Smart move, mate.BoxBuzz wrote: However, Just so it's not considered such, I have retracted my comment.
I shouldn't have to be here to keep you honest, though.
"Anything for the ladies".
would that be taken as disrespectful? or just attentive and nurturing?
Purely hypothetical of course. However I would assume one would take it as being attentive.
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
You'd be surprised at the opinions that float about where people are free to express themselves......and sometimes the opinions that float to the top and are given much review are some of the most aromatically offensive of all.Adamj1987 wrote:how can anyone say he was a bum?
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
im not surprised by any opinion on here any more since the thread about de la hoya being and overachieving bum with no tallentBoxBuzz wrote:You'd be surprised at the opinions that float about where people are free to express themselves......and sometimes the opinions that float to the top and are given much review are some of the most aromatically offensive of all.Adamj1987 wrote:how can anyone say he was a bum?
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
Well it's legitimate, as an opinion. But for most of us it reveals more about the purveyor of the opinion than it would about DLH.
But hey the fans have been calling out to sports figures that they are "bums" since the first fight broke out. (I have to assume that fighting was the first sport invented, since it comes so naturally, though only a few can raise it to an art, like great boxers do.)
But hey the fans have been calling out to sports figures that they are "bums" since the first fight broke out. (I have to assume that fighting was the first sport invented, since it comes so naturally, though only a few can raise it to an art, like great boxers do.)
-
Collins2000
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 4175
- Joined: 06 May 2002, 06:13
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
BoxBuzz wrote:If someone were to respond to this by sayingCollins2000 wrote:Smart move, mate.BoxBuzz wrote: However, Just so it's not considered such, I have retracted my comment.
I shouldn't have to be here to keep you honest, though.
"Anything for the ladies".
would that be taken as disrespectful? or just attentive and nurturing?
Purely hypothetical of course. However I would assume one would take it as being attentive.
It depends who said it, Buzz
Hypothetically speaking, of course, if you said it, I'd expect Shep to call you into his metaphorical office and give you a lecture to get you back on message. It's an imprtant "job" being a moderator, Buzz. <snigger>
So, you are aware of the theme for 2010, Buzz?
The good SHEPherd wants to clean up the stable. I'm doing my bit. Let me see you doing yours, sir.
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
Anybody know what kind of shape Ken is in nowadays? I know he was in a bad wreck.ThatOne wrote:I am pleased with the results.
I enjoyed Ken Norton.
And a nice guy too.
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
indeed its a gernally bad opinion but they are titled too it like the opinion this thread is based onBoxBuzz wrote:Well it's legitimate, as an opinion. But for most of us it reveals more about the purveyor of the opinion than it would about DLH.
But hey the fans have been calling out to sports figures that they are "bums" since the first fight broke out. (I have to assume that fighting was the first sport invented, since it comes so naturally, though only a few can raise it to an art, like great boxers do.)
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
yancey wrote:Anybody know what kind of shape Ken is in nowadays? I know he was in a bad wreck.ThatOne wrote:I am pleased with the results.
I enjoyed Ken Norton.
And a nice guy too.
He recovered from the wreck which by the way Muhammad Ali was the first non-family member to come see him in the hospital.
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
I hear conflicting reports about Kenny's condition. I saw a photo of him at a WBHOF golf tournament a couple of years ago and he looked okay in the picture.yancey wrote:Anybody know what kind of shape Ken is in nowadays? I know he was in a bad wreck.ThatOne wrote:I am pleased with the results.
I enjoyed Ken Norton.
And a nice guy too.
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
I would not say he recovered. Although he is functional, he suffered some relatively profound physical and neurological deficits from the accident. For example, Kenny talks with a slurred speech, which resulted from the accident, not his boxing career.ThatOne wrote:yancey wrote:Anybody know what kind of shape Ken is in nowadays? I know he was in a bad wreck.ThatOne wrote:I am pleased with the results.
I enjoyed Ken Norton.
And a nice guy too.
He recovered from the wreck which by the way Muhammad Ali was the first non-family member to come see him in the hospital.
-
HomicideHenry
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 18722
- Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
Norton was no bum.
-
Collins2000
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 4175
- Joined: 06 May 2002, 06:13
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
THE DEFINITIVE REPLY.HomicideHenry wrote:Norton was no bum.
-
Rick Farris
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 7200
- Joined: 15 Feb 2008, 16:04
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
I don't believe Ali considers Kenny a bum, or Larry Holmes? Quarry and a few others would never co-sign that notion.
Of course, what do boxers know about boxing? We have real experts blowing wind on internet boxing sites.
Of course, what do boxers know about boxing? We have real experts blowing wind on internet boxing sites.
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
indeed but correctCollins2000 wrote:THE DEFINITIVE REPLY.HomicideHenry wrote:Norton was no bum.
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
27-0? This is quite the day for elections.
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
28-0
Maybe Kenny wants to post here.
Maybe Kenny wants to post here.
Re: Was Ken Norton A "Bum"
im sick of seeing this thread can it not be locked its gone into a personal slanging match