YOUR score for the Ali-Norton fights.

[Goodnight, Irene]

People can say whatever they feel of me, but at least I have the conviction to make my viewpoint known & stand by it.

As someone who does have good things to say, & does have insight, it is way too common a sight to see you mired in double-speak, attempting awkward comedy, or just plain posting for the sake of it, having added nor taken anything from what is in discussion. A lot of this stuff you post strikes me as going around in one wide, long circle, & concluding the post two or three paragraphs later at the starting point.

Get off the fence & stick by something, Buzz.

[BoxBuzz]

At the end of the fight the body language would be consistent with what Irene is saying. I have not heard the words "Yeah I lost". But another possiblity (as Irene points out, words can utilized in sarcastic ways.) He COULD have been scolding the listener with a "Yeah Right" sort of dripping sarcasm.

Just a possibility.....

[Goodnight, Irene]

If I can find this footage, you will see it is not a possibility. Ali's face conveys a despondent figure. Its hard to be sure, but it looks like he may not even be looking directly at the reporter.

He looks just as the interviewer describes him (like a man who lost, rather than won). He just looks plain tired --- of everything. Clearly, a fighter who should've already been in retirement anyway.

[BoxBuzz]

Irene, on a personal level, (since you brought the personal aspect up) you strike me as the sort who may well on occasion (or perhaps more often than that) be wrong, but nevertheless is seldom if ever in doubt. And just like the pot stirrer who may seldom feel he "knows" much of anything.....(lol let that be me in this case) we need all kinds to make a forum.

"I know what I know if you know what I mean."


Always liked that lyric....from a student of Paul Simon....one that he eventually married if I'm not mistaken.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Conviction & arrogance are very difficult to distinguish, don't you know?

[BoxBuzz]

touche'

I've responded to your last contribution in the Ali Tyson thread....based on who was the most overated.

[yancey]

Norton was the recipient of a big-time screw job in Yankee Stadium and most everyone knows it.

The body language in that ring immediately after the fight concluded was so telling, imo.

I kind of feel bad for Norton, he should have been the bonafide heavyweight champion, won fair and square in the ring.

[The Great John L]

It was about a year or so I saw it. I'm racking my mind trying to remember the name of the DVD. It was a generic Ali doco --- unfortunately, we know there are boatloads of these floating about. I did a quick YouTube search about two weeks ago looking for this & came up empty, but now I think I'll dig a little deeper. It has to be out there. I just need to recall the damn doco name.

I'm sure that others are as miffed as I am, because it is out of character for Ali, and most top fighters as well. He was hardly beaten from pillar to post in that fight. I'm sure you aren't making it up, but it seems that perhaps it might have been taken out of context, or maybe the video was edited so that it was presented out of context.

Certainly he looked exhausted after the fight and was probably getting pretty tired of the grind, but he looked that same way after many of his later career fights.

It would be very interesting to see.

[The Great John L]

Norton was the recipient of a big-time screw job in Yankee Stadium and most everyone knows it.

The body language in that ring immediately after the fight concluded was so telling, imo.

I kind of feel bad for Norton, he should have been the bonafide heavyweight champion, won fair and square in the ring.

There's no reason to feel too bad for Norton, since he got some payback with his win over Young, that many thought he lost, and the subsequent gift of a "title". Norton was a very good fighter, but besides his trilogy with Ali, which was great, his resume wasn't really that great for a HW fighting during such a stellar era.

Shouldn't we also feel at least as sorry for Young, who lost a very controversial decision to Ali, and a tossup to Norton that would have probably given him the same "title" that was handed to Norton? And besides those two fights, Young beat Foreman and Lyle and was given a controversial draw in the second Shavers fight in a fight most reports I have read thought he should have won. So with just slightly different scoring in close/controversial fights Young could have had wins over Foreman, Lyle, Shavers, Ali and Norton on his resume.

[dempseyfire]

John L, I think anyone screaming about Norton-Young being a robbery are way off. I had Norton a clear winner in a close fight. It's not even in the same planet of the same galaxy of a decision that was the Ali-Norton III stink (neither was Young-Ali for that matter)

Bogus title? Both Ali and Spinks wanted nothing to do with the deserved number 1 contender in Norton . . so why shouldn't have he gotten the WBC belt? Especially since he deserved to win the third fight vs Ali in the first place.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I had Young 8-7 in that one.

[The Great John L]

John L, I think anyone screaming about Norton-Young being a robbery are way off. I had Norton a clear winner in a close fight. It's not even in the same planet of the same galaxy of a decision that was the Ali-Norton III stink (neither was Young-Ali for that matter)

Who said anything about robery? Please don't put words in my mouth. I had Young beating Norton pretty clearly in a close competitive bout. I also had Norton beating Ali, but neither of them was a robbery. Many of the Ali-Norton rounds were very close in all three of their fights, much like the brief discussion of R15 in the third. You seemed confident that Noerton won it clearly, but I hardly think either of them won it clearly because there were so few punches of consequence landed.

At the time these fights all took place there was quite an uproar about the Ali-Young fight, regardless of how you feel about the scoring. In fact I still have many of the articles from that fight with many reporters calling it a robbery, including the famopus Young column where he diessected many of the first 5 rounds that were given to Ali despite throwing virtually no punches. Of course these are all opinions, which is why I reserve the "robbery" claims for more obvious indiscretions.

Bogus title? Both Ali and Spinks wanted nothing to do with the deserved number 1 contender in Norton . . so why shouldn't have he gotten the WBC belt? Especially since he deserved to win the third fight vs Ali in the first place.

You complained about Vitali being handed the Ring belt, but you give a pass to Norton who was handed a title in a similar manner without winning it in the ring. Meanwhile Tate had to fight a tournament against some of the better HWs of the time, while Norton was handed a belt during a press conference. Let's try to be consistent. Certainly Norton was a fine fighter, and I agree I thought he won the 3rd fight with Ali, but it was hardly a robbery where he won almost all the rounds convincingly.

[The Great John L]

I had Young 8-7 in that one.

I think I had him by 2 points. Close enough to not get too worked up, and many of the rounds were close.

[Robinson]

I had Norton beating Young. I can rescore it as it has been a while
since I did watch it. But I do recall it being close, but not a robbery
or anything of the sort.

[dempseyfire]

John L, I think anyone screaming about Norton-Young being a robbery are way off. I had Norton a clear winner in a close fight. It's not even in the same planet of the same galaxy of a decision that was the Ali-Norton III stink (neither was Young-Ali for that matter)

Who said anything about robery? Please don't put words in my mouth. I had Young beating Norton pretty clearly in a close competitive bout. I also had Norton beating Ali, but neither of them was a robbery. Many of the Ali-Norton rounds were very close in all three of their fights, much like the brief discussion of R15 in the third. You seemed confident that Noerton won it clearly, but I hardly think either of them won it clearly because there were so few punches of consequence landed.

At the time these fights all took place there was quite an uproar about the Ali-Young fight, regardless of how you feel about the scoring. In fact I still have many of the articles from that fight with many reporters calling it a robbery, including the famopus Young column where he diessected many of the first 5 rounds that were given to Ali despite throwing virtually no punches. Of course these are all opinions, which is why I reserve the "robbery" claims for more obvious indiscretions.

Bogus title? Both Ali and Spinks wanted nothing to do with the deserved number 1 contender in Norton . . so why shouldn't have he gotten the WBC belt? Especially since he deserved to win the third fight vs Ali in the first place.

You complained about Vitali being handed the Ring belt, but you give a pass to Norton who was handed a title in a similar manner without winning it in the ring. Meanwhile Tate had to fight a tournament against some of the better HWs of the time, while Norton was handed a belt during a press conference. Let's try to be consistent. Certainly Norton was a fine fighter, and I agree I thought he won the 3rd fight with Ali, but it was hardly a robbery where he won almost all the rounds convincingly.

Vitali wasn't a mandatory being ducked by the two people fighting for the title a la Ali and Spinks. It's a different scenario.

I'll just strongly disagree via Ali-Norton. I think Norton won clear, commanding decisions in the first and third fights. I don't think one has to beat someone pillar to post to clearly win a round, and I don't credit Ali for simply dancing around and missing jabs like some judges apparently do.

[GranberryReturns]

Ali didn't win one round in his trilogies with Joe Fraxzier and Ken Norton despite what his acolytes claim.

[SteveO]

I scored every round for Ali in all his professional contests - even without seeing some of them

[BoxBuzz]

Well you should get together with GR....you complete one another.

[Tryingtoplay]

Great discussion.

I find that the third Ali-Norton fight is a bit of a difficult fight to score in that my final card doesn't come out quite how the flow of the fight feels to me. It is similar to the third Pacquiao-Marquez fight in this regard. As was the case with Marquez in that fight, it feels to me like Norton generally controls the flow of the fight and on average won his rounds by a wider margin than Ali did his, but at the end of the fight the results are much closer when judged purely on a round by round basis. I re-watched the fight a few years back and took some notes on it. In essence, I saw the fight as follows:

In my eyes, rounds 1, 7, 9 and 11 were very clear-cut Ali rounds. I also do not feel as Norton has much of a credible claim to the 15th round, although it is a more difficult round to score in that neither fighter really impacted the round in any particularly substantial way. Norton did his best to try to close the gap on Ali, but by the middle of the round it is clear that his tank had reached empty. He just had nothing left. Furthermore, while Ali threw a fairly heavy volume of punches, he didn't really land much of consequence, so it isn't really a round that I feel great in giving him, but I think that on-balance, it is hard to argue that Norton deserves to win the round.

Meanwhile, I find rounds 2, 5, 6 and 12 to be fairly clear Norton rounds. Rounds 3 and 8 were a bit closer than rounds 2, 5, 6 and 12, but I think that in both of them, Norton edged Ali out in both.

That leaves us with three rounds, 4, 10, 13 and 14, which were all razor-edge rounds in my view.

The 10th round is an incredible round. It is situated amidst Ali's resurgence over the course of the middle of the fight, but unlike in the 9th and 11th rounds, at no point does it feel as though the round has slipped away from Norton. He is right with Ali to the end of the round. When scoring the fight, I felt as though won it by a very slight margin, but I can see someone giving it to Norton. He landed the bigger shots and never lost control of the round. To me though, it still felt as though he was fighting an uphill fight against a resurging Ali and so I gave it a very tight round to Ali.

Personally, I give the 13th round to Norton. It was an even closer round than rounds 3 or 8 and I can see it going either way, but when forced to decide it, I give it to Norton by a small margin. On the flip side, I gave the 14th round, by a very close margin, to Ali. From the 12th to the 14th rounds, you can clearly see Norton fading and by the 14th round, Ali was back to fighting Norton on a basically equal footing after having been pretty badly beaten in the 12th round (in my view) and losing a very close round in the 13th (also, in my view). It is very close to a dead even round, but I give the very slight edge to Ali.

That leaves us with the 4th round. When I scored it live, I gave the round, by a tiny margin, to Norton. After the fight, I went back and re-watched the round and the second time through I felt as though Ali had just slightly won it. Of course, in light of how I scored the surrounding rounds, I may have inadvertently been awarding Ali a comparative round at that point, so I will stay with my original conclusion. However, I can easily see someone scoring the round for Ali. One could also simply score it a draw, which is something that I try very hard not to do.

Hence, with modern scoring, my card was as follows:

Round 1 - 10-9 Ali
Round 2- 10-9 Norton
Round 3- 10-9 Norton
Round 4- 10-9 Norton
Round 5- 10-9 Norton
Round 6- 10-9 Norton
Round 7- 10-9 Ali
Round 8- 10-9 Norton
Round 9- 10-9 Ali
Round 10- 10-9 Ali
Round 11- 10-9 Ali
Round 12- 10-9 Norton
Round 13- 10-9 Norton
Round 14- 10-9 Ali
Round 15- 10-9 Ali

143-142 Norton (8 rounds to 7)

This means that by final tally, the fight comes down to how I score the nail-biter fourth round. When watching the fight, the overall feeling that I have is that Norton won it by a wider margin than that and deserved to be World Champion. Yet, that is not what my final card reflects. Granted, I gave him the fight, but by only the thinnest of margins. Hence, I can sympathize with the judges in terms of the result which they reached.

[BoxBuzz]

This is not an unrealistic call. By the way all of the judges and the ref have stood by their calls. Which says something about what they believe they saw....no regrets, or wishes to change their call were ever registered....which is not the case for some judges calls as time passed...... Holyfield Lewis comes to mind here.


Also Joe Frazier....who was much closer to Kenny than Muhammad called it a draw, and stood by that belief as time went on.

Not that these are overly compelling, just grist for the mill as we look back. The ref in that case was pretty articulate that he believed Ali won.......It is my opinion that he was both honest, and knowledgeable, and claimed that his view gave him a pretty good basis for evaluation.

Some disagree rather profusely.....but all of that needs to be considered.

Also..... there are those who hold the opinion that....anytime Ali did not overly dominate....he apparently deserved to lose. In the case of Doug Jones....it was because he did not live up to what was expected of him......but he did clearly win the fight in my opinion. In the case of Young.....Young hung himself out to dry by sticking his head out of the ring........

and I was one of those that thought that the Norton Young fight was an inconclusive outcome. I ever so slightly favored Young. But a draw made sense....and Norton by one round doesn't ruin my day.

Close fights are just that......close fights. And the judges are stuck with the making sense of it.

[DrDuke]

The 1st and the 2nd fights were scored in a proper way. The 3rd bout is an absolute robbery, a one of the biggest robberies in boxing, as Ali has done almost nothing that time.

[BoxBuzz]

The 1st and the 2nd fights were scored in a proper way. The 3rd bout is an absolute robbery, a one of the biggest robberies in boxing, as Ali has done almost nothing that time.

So, Frazier and the judges and ref just had honest coinciding "lapses of judgement"......or were in on some sort of conspiracy...or mass hallucination? There was also an all celebrity tv panel (with Frazier on board) that though the panelists differed on their outcomes, ended up averaging out to a draw.

Was the Ali mystique that powerful?

Or......was it just a close fight?

[DrDuke]

The 1st and the 2nd fights were scored in a proper way. The 3rd bout is an absolute robbery, a one of the biggest robberies in boxing, as Ali has done almost nothing that time.

So, Frazier and the judges and ref just had honest coinciding "lapses of judgement"......or were in on some sort of conspiracy...or mass hallucination? There was also an all celebrity tv panel (with Frazier on board) that though the panelists differed on their outcomes, ended up averaging out to a draw.

Was the Ali mystique that powerful?

Or......was it just a close fight?

As if judges are something inarguable and always right. The whole arena was booing after the announcement of the decision, Ali walked away without an interview. Anyway all that stuff and all you've mentioned is not so important. Try to watch the fight, everything was pretty clear there.

[BoxBuzz]

Yep, It's all ya gotta do. Close fight it is!

Otherwise, I don't disagree. Judges are often wrong, crowds often boo, celebrities don't know much.