Ali vs Norton: Did Norton won all three fights?

[gregor]

If there is general consensus that it should be 2-1 for Norton, than one has to admit that scoring it 2-1 for Ali is even worse than 3-0 for Norton - both scores are obviously wrong, but at least the latter shows who really won the trilogy.

[BoxBuzz]

Ok then, here is the final word.

According the those who were carefully trained, worked hard to master their pugilistic judgment and decisionary skills, discriminatingly selected to serve, and in turn entrusted in good faith, to render the fair, reasonable and proper decision, it is a matter of public record that Norton fell short of the majority of wins in the matter of Ali vs Norton.

The record is clear. The clouds have parted. The decisions stand. Clarity has been achieved.

You the reader have been enlightened.

Wherever there is doubt or ambiguity, you can count on our group of hard nosed pros to ferret out the issue, discuss and debate the details and resolve the matter.

Followed in turn by my final authoritative statement, sythesizing the sensiblities and appropriately ratiionalizing the reasoning.

This thread will not be locked, however I'm quite certain that all following comments will be exclusively in agreement with this catagorically concise conclusion.


oh and G.I. the "two dotted i's in the word "ratiionallizing" are my gift to you.

[Goodnight, Irene]

I laughed when you closed the other thread for, "irrelevant posts," in apparent braindead seclusion from introspection. Your posts are the blathering definition of wandering, aimless, go-nowhere and add-nothing irrelevance.

[BoxBuzz]

Ah yes....well that's your opinion!

But I did make reference to the main topic of the thread....and it is clear that I have a strong...(you may add eccentric, idiotic, brain dead, humorous, delightful, eclectic, droll or any other adj you feel is correctly descriptive) about the topic at hand. I added more of my two coppers worth ...and thus my vacant mind sees a difference. And it's ok if you don't discriminate in like fashion!

The locking of the thread which you refer to, was utiliitarian in nature...and not judgmental. Just served to let YOU know that when YOU have a contribution, it will be appreciated, and sequestered for proper and efficient processing. I know you are working on your list, and take all the time you need! (Yes I did add an incidental judgmental comment on the superflous nature of a post or two. Was one of them yours?)


Now on the other hand, the thread you dredged from the depths of years ago, (purely for you to air your disdain), was indeed a judgment call on my part, and.....like Steele's call at the end of the Taylor fight it could have gone either way I suppose. But that was the mood that suited me at the time.

So there you have it....full public disclosure.

I have faith that this continues to build the bond of trust that we have been striving mightily to achieve lo these many years.

Have a very good day!

[Goodnight, Irene]

I said I laughed. You must've interpreted that as meaning I cared.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I think Norton won the first and the last.

Don't feel obliged to pull up every argument that went on while you were away. It's annoying.

[Giancarlo]

Ok then, here is the final word.

According the those who were carefully trained, worked hard to master their pugilistic judgment and decisionary skills, discriminatingly selected to serve, and in turn entrusted in good faith, to render the fair, reasonable and proper decision, it is a matter of public record that Norton fell short of the majority of wins in the matter of Ali vs Norton.

The record is clear. The clouds have parted. The decisions stand. Clarity has been achieved.

You the reader have been enlightened.

Wherever there is doubt or ambiguity, you can count on our group of hard nosed pros to ferret out the issue, discuss and debate the details and resolve the matter.

Followed in turn by my final authoritative statement, sythesizing the sensiblities and appropriately ratiionalizing the reasoning.

This thread will not be locked, however I'm quite certain that all following comments will be exclusively in agreement with this catagorically concise conclusion.


oh and G.I. the "two dotted i's in the word "ratiionallizing" are my gift to you.

You don't have time to score the Norton - Cobb bout but you do have time to churn out pointless nonsense like this hour after hour?

[BoxBuzz]

I said I laughed. You must've interpreted that as meaning I cared.

No, Not for a moment. Seems like quite a tangent assumption.

However I'm told laughter is healing......so forgive me if I take some pleasure in knowng that this very laughter will be helpful in your pursuit of a rapid and complete recovery. A recovery that I hope takes far less time that it took for Ali's Jaw to heal in his singular losing effort to Kenny Norton. This according to the record books.

[BoxBuzz]

Ok then, here is the final word.

According the those who were carefully trained, worked hard to master their pugilistic judgment and decisionary skills, discriminatingly selected to serve, and in turn entrusted in good faith, to render the fair, reasonable and proper decision, it is a matter of public record that Norton fell short of the majority of wins in the matter of Ali vs Norton.

The record is clear. The clouds have parted. The decisions stand. Clarity has been achieved.

You the reader have been enlightened.

Wherever there is doubt or ambiguity, you can count on our group of hard nosed pros to ferret out the issue, discuss and debate the details and resolve the matter.

Followed in turn by my final authoritative statement, sythesizing the sensiblities and appropriately ratiionalizing the reasoning.

This thread will not be locked, however I'm quite certain that all following comments will be exclusively in agreement with this catagorically concise conclusion.


oh and G.I. the "two dotted i's in the word "ratiionallizing" are my gift to you.

You don't have time to score the Norton - Cobb bout but you do have time to churn out pointless nonsense like this hour after hour?

Glad you asked! And always willing to engage in a any good faith inquiry. Please note that my remarks are connected to the main theme of this thread. I'm dissapointed that you now appear to want to change the subject to ol Buzz'z "free time". Not sure why that interests you so much. However If I recall, both you and G.I. are from near the same longitude and latitude. I suggest you both meet up in your "free time" and discuss your mutual concern regarding my actions over a brew. lol.

And I will eventually get round to doing this task. However as you suspect, I am worried that should I score it for Norton, I will be faced with a most unpleasant task. That of having to decide between what the trained professionals at the time agreed was the true and accurate appraisal, versus my own lying eyes, aided and abetted by the one dimensionality of watching a fight limited by the two dimensional camera lens point of view. Something that many others have appeared to succumb to. Won't I be subject to criticism? Not sure I could stand the heat. Joe Frazier gave it to his friend Kenny by one round on a CBS special the following week after the bout......wow sounds like it might have been a close one!

[Giancarlo]

Ok then, here is the final word.

According the those who were carefully trained, worked hard to master their pugilistic judgment and decisionary skills, discriminatingly selected to serve, and in turn entrusted in good faith, to render the fair, reasonable and proper decision, it is a matter of public record that Norton fell short of the majority of wins in the matter of Ali vs Norton.

The record is clear. The clouds have parted. The decisions stand. Clarity has been achieved.

You the reader have been enlightened.

Wherever there is doubt or ambiguity, you can count on our group of hard nosed pros to ferret out the issue, discuss and debate the details and resolve the matter.

Followed in turn by my final authoritative statement, sythesizing the sensiblities and appropriately ratiionalizing the reasoning.

This thread will not be locked, however I'm quite certain that all following comments will be exclusively in agreement with this catagorically concise conclusion.


oh and G.I. the "two dotted i's in the word "ratiionallizing" are my gift to you.

You don't have time to score the Norton - Cobb bout but you do have time to churn out pointless nonsense like this hour after hour?

Glad you asked! And always willing to engage in a any good faith inquiry. Please note that my remarks are connected to the main theme of this thread. I'm dissapointed that you now appear to want to change the subject to ol Buzz'z "free time". Not sure why that interests you so much. However If I recall, both you and G.I. are from near the same longitude and latitude. I suggest you both meet up in your "free time" and discuss your mutual concern regarding my actions over a brew. lol.

And I will eventually get round to doing this task. However as you suspect, I am worried that should I score it for Norton, I will be faced with a most unpleasant task. That of having to decide between what the trained professionals at the time agreed was the true and accurate appraisal, versus my own lying eyes, aided and abetted by the one dimensionality of watching a fight limited by the two dimensional camera lens point of view. Something that many others have appeared to succumb to. Won't I be subject to criticism? Not sure I could stand the heat. Joe Frazier gave it to his friend Kenny by one round on a CBS special the following week after the bout......wow sounds like it might have been a close one!

I suspect in the time it took you to clog up the thread with another long-winded post you could have watched, scored and posted Round 1.

Then onto Round 2.

And so on.

It's not hard.

[BoxBuzz]

Clogging up? Surely you mean "gracing the page". I speak only from the heart at all times.

[boxingguy2469]

I had for several long years believed that Norton had Ali's number. I was brainwashed into believing that Ali just barely won their second fight. I did not see it because I didn't have the greenbacks....I recently worked up my nerve and watched the 2nd fight on YouTube...Unbelievable!!!!! I simply could not believe my eyes!!!! I watched each round carefully and at least twice. Norton was pathetic in the first 6 rounds. In the 6th, both of Norton's eyes were puffy and blackened. He also had a cut under his left eye. Also in that round Ali landed a booming right that almost put Norton down. Ali was going for the KO as Howard Cosell was going nuts! Then the bell rang. Norton came back some in the latter rounds. In the last round a tired Norton tried throwing left hooks and Ali easily ducked them. Ali landed another great right and nearly did Norton in.

I think the problem is that fans have a tendency to remember the latter rounds more than the early rounds. I scored it 8-3-1 Ali. Man was I EVER surprised and happy to see that Ali actually beat and "Whupped" Norton! I was SO wrong in thinking that Norton always had "Ali's number"....

Close fight? Not even!

A friend of Winston Churchill once said "You know Winston, I've never shown you any pictures of my grandchildren!" Winston leaned over, put his arm on his friend's shoulder and said "And ya know, you've made me a very 'appy man!

I am happier than Churchill now that I know that Ali "Whupped" Norton good in their second fight!!!!

As for the 3rd fight...Many opinions....Ali's reflexes were shot and he barely squeaked out a decision partially because he was the defending champion....Ya gotta "beat" the champ...Norton did nothing to deserve this title shot. He was destroyed by Foreman in 2 rounds. He never fought Frazier because they were such thweet friends...Ali beat both these guys. Just how long does anyone think Norton would have remained champion if he had been awarded the decision in the 3rd fight? George Foreman? 1, 2, down....Frazier, same....Lyle? same....Ernie Shavers? Down in one and it ACTUALLY HAPPENED....

One more thing about the 3rd fight...At the interview the next day, Norton was sitting there wearing sunglasses to try and cover his 2 black eyes, to no avail...Ali wore none and was unmarked....SO much for Ali only landing "Pitty-pat" jabs.....

[BoxBuzz]

Geez Louise, this is fer sure gonna stir up the Nortonions again, and they are going to come armed with their pitchforks and torches. This needless rattling of sabers, will only lead to tears.

[HomicideHenry]

I think maybe a long time ago I posted on this thread, ain't sure, but I've always felt Norton won at least two of the three fights.

[yancey]

I think maybe a long time ago I posted on this thread, ain't sure, but I've always felt Norton won at least two of the three fights.

Agree, Norton won the first and third fights.

I suspect most of the Ali fan boy set deep down know that their guy lost the Yankee Stadium fight.

[witherspoon]

I just happened to come across a scrap of paper in my desk drawer, dating back about 18 months:
Muhammad Ali v Ken Norton 10th Sep 1973.
1. 10 - 9 Ali
2. 10 - 9 Ali
3. 10 - 10
4. 10 - 9 Ali
5. 9 - 10 Norton
6. 10 - 9 Ali
7. 8 - 10 Norton
8. 10 - 10
9. 10 - 10
10. 9 - 10 Norton
11. 9 - 10 Norton
12. 10 - 9 Ali

115 - 115,
Ali by 5-4-3.
Can anyone help to explain why I would give Norton a 2 point round in the seventh? I can't remember too much, I'm going to watch this again and report back.

I have to admit that I always took it for granted that Norton got screwed big time in the third fight, based solely on what I had heard and read. I don't think it's a clear cut issue, but it is a hard fight to watch and stay focused. Neither mans finest hour.
Fight number two is underrated though, excellent fight.

[ThatOne]

Ali-Norton III Remembered Through Schuyler's Eyes

http://www.BS.com/?m=show&opt= ... e&id=28324

[BoxBuzz]

Finally a fair and balanced accounting.

[boxingguy2469]

Re: 2nd fight.....99% of the time a fighter wins a round 10-9 unless he knocks the other guy down.....

1st fight: Norton awarded a split decision....Who was the moron who scored it for Ali??????

2nd fight: It was scored a split decision for Ali....Ali easily by unanimous in my book.....Who is the moron who scored it for Norton??????

3rd fight: About a draw, Ali retains title.....Many close and befuddling rounds.....At this point in Ali's career his reflexes were shot and he was a worn fighter. He beat Foreman and Frazier in 2 grueling matches....Did Norton have to do that???????? Nope!!!! How long would Norton have retained the title if he had been given the decision? Zilch! That's why they say "Ya gotta BEAT the champ". This way the title won't be changing hands every other Tuesday....

Norton looked beaten up after the 3rd fight....not Ali...

[witherspoon]

Re 7th round:
Some smart fella was on these boards a while back making a very good case for more liberal use of
10-8 and 10-7 rounds, the logic being that you generate less controversy when a fighter who just nicks a round is consistently earning less points than a fighter who dominates without scoring a knockdown.
This is why I scored round 7 10-8.
I gave up on this method when it became the main arguing point while comparing scores, rather than the fight itself. Even so, I still think its a good idea (in the hands of someone more competent than me, obviously, too many even rounds).

[ThatOne]

Finally a fair and balanced accounting.

http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/colu ... id=5247526

Another contemporaneous account or something approximate to it as this gentleman saw the bout in real time.

[yancey]

Some of us don't need to keep posting up these "fair and balanced" reports from various "journalists" in order to convince ourselves of what really down in Yankee Stadium that night.

Norton clearly won and Ali was gifted yet again.

[ThatOne]

Some of us don't need to keep posting up these "fair and balanced" reports from various "journalists" in order to convince ourselves of what really down in Yankee Stadium that night.

Norton clearly won and Ali was gifted yet again.

I'm just posting contemporaneous accounts, bro.

[BoxBuzz]

Some of us don't need to keep posting up these "fair and balanced" reports from various "journalists" in order to convince ourselves of what really down in Yankee Stadium that night.

Norton clearly won and Ali was gifted yet again.

Nonsense, even good ol Joe said Kenny snuck past Ali by a single round. And of Course Joe was completely unbias.

Just to be sure, I just took another look at the record book. No discerrnable change from the last time i looked. Turns out Ali won on all the scorecards by a comfortable margin.

So this should bring this conversation to a definitive conclusion.


Thank you all for your heartfelt and thoughtful contributions.

[aajayunlimited]

No way. Ali won the 2nd and 3rd fights. I thought like many of you until I watched what actually happened again. Part of that is because Ken Norton was Ali's toughest opponent(by far) and he did some really great things in both of these fights.

In the 1st fight, Ali definitely won rounds 1, 3, 11, and any rounds where he contested the round. These rounds were hard to come by for Ali in this fight--mainly due to being hurt early. I believe this to be the case--despite what the late Ken Norton later said(said 11th or 12th rd.)--Cosell and Pacheco both noticed it. Cosell asked Angie what was wrong with Ali and Pacheco said that he had a cracked tooth during the fight(about halfway in, conversations were made between Cosell and the seconds); I believe this to be a euphemistic comment by a corner(from Pacheco) who identifies with Ali and didn't want it to come out about a broken jaw. What gives Norton the first fight was that there were a lot of rounds where Ali did not contest the round and Norton(though he was not landing) won the rounds on sheer activity. Then, despite the 1st 2 minutes of round 12 being uneventful, it really picked up after that where Ali was countered on every weak punch with good punches and hurt badly afterward in the last third of the fight.

In the 2nd fight, Ali won the first 5 rounds BIG(you'd be hard pressed to even see Norton land a punch here) and the 6th BIG, too(only Norton was starting to come on a little). 7 - 12 went absolutely back and forth--with Norton winning at least a couple of 2 point rounds in there. You could even argue that rounds 1 - 5 were 2 point rounds for Ali, because Ali looked impressive and Norton did nothing here but chase and get tagged. Also, round 6, could have been scored a 2 point round, too, because Norton was badly hurt. However, if you give Ali the bare minimum and Norton the maximum(as the judges/commentators did), then you have Ali needing the 12th round to win. AND He did win but not by much(Norton really came on late in the round with some big punches, but Ali had a historic round).

In the rubber match, there were plenty of rounds(at least 3) where Norton landed a good punch or two that could not be definitely proven to hurt Ali and Ali was landing either a round of jabs or combinations in that same round. Those rounds have to go to Ali. Now, there were some rounds where Norton landed just 3 good shots, applied a constant jab(had reach, was powerful, and Ali was so unsettled by it that he lost an overwhelming majority of the rounds when this takes place), activity(when Ali did nothing), land one or two good punches when Ali did almost nothing, and/or hurt Ali(as in round 6); those rounds go to Norton. He had all those ways to win a round(more ways than Ali) and by EXAMINING the fight, that--for whatever reason--just wasn't going on enough. You'll find that there are more rounds where Norton landed one or two good punches and where Ali did enough to overcome this(a few of these times by far). Norton could have won a few rounds with a body attack--which Norton was accurate enough even against Ali(who was the best at defending and taking body shots). Instead, he head hunted more and did the mixed bag thing(Norton's trademark was being both) less in this fight. If Norton was able to land in Round 5 when Ali did nothing, he could have gotten a 2 point round there(but since he could not--I gave Norton one point for this rd.) Round 13 does not go to Norton--in my opinion--because Norton missed most of his punches in that round all-the-while Ali was landN wild punches(good showmenship /w the rope-a-dope for Norton, though). I--mirroring the last judge--scored only had one round even: rd. 12 and was surprised with all even rounds that were scored(sounds unprofessional and not likely how an official would score a fight--a job means that you have2make tough, unbiased, unpopular decisions in this area or that and more than 2 even rounds point at indecisiveness) by commentators that were biased--if only slightly.

These commentators scored some rounds even or for Norton in which Norton landed only 1 or 2 good punches and Ali landed the jab and an occassional right hand for most of a given round. They were also inconsistent; one of them gave an early round to Ali in which Norton landed a couple of big punches in a round that Ali was "typical Ali" and--when Ali and Norton did the same thing in a later round--he gave the later round to Norton. Also, in round 15, Ali did a little more than Norton; as don dunphy once remarked--in reference to the jab--[fighter: believe it was Joe Louis] was "piling up points!" Whether you score round 15 even or for one or the other, still Ali would have been truly robbed--if he did not win. Norton had too rounds where he was almost the winner of a round(if 1 or 2 punches can win a round in which another fighter is doing a lot, then there has to be evidence that that fighter was hurt--as in rd. 6--by the one or two punches).