BoxRec

If Ali never lost to Frazier and Norton would that of had taken away from his legacy?

Why would it take anything away?

crusader wrote:Why would it take anything away?

When you beat everybody people sometimes belittle your opponents

I think the losses secured it. It showed he had some competent rivals which
is always important to a legacy.

And that he 'bested' these men. Atleast on paper.

You need great conquests in order to be yourself considered greater.

Anybody that doesn't factor good losses into an evaluation of a career isn't doing it right. It always bothers me when people just list straight results without how they happened. In all honesty, the next time ali beats Norton will be the first time imo. Everyone has their foil. But Frazier and Norton were where Ali showed just how damn tough he was. And there were still people that questioned that.

Coming back and winning the trilogy with Frazier and Norton were important for ultimate perceptions. Coming back from the Spinks loss was probably somewhat neutral by that stage in his career but winning the second won had to be a net gain vs leaving his career with a loss.

By the way though the third fight with Norton seems to be the most controversial of these, I've always thought that Joe Frazier (good friend of Kenny) seeing this fight as either a draw or a one round win for Norton is balancing to some of the reactive judgments that abound. If Frazier can call it very close or even a draw, then that should open the door for many legitimate interpretations. IMHO. They were all close fights including the first one.

I'm not sure the loss to Holmes or Berbick matter to many people at this point. Most of the public believe he was debilitated by that time and just marvel that he wasn't brutaly KO'd in both of those fights. The net perception of those two fights seems to be a general "wow what a chin" comment.

And don't go on about who in YOUR opinion "really" won or lost any of those fights. Or any other of the close ones for that matter. I'm speaking about the real time official outcomes which most of the public is willing to go along with though we "experts" know so much better.

The third Norton fight wasn't close at all, Frazier was just hoping for a 4th Ali fight. One of, and maybe the worst, robbery for a real championship in history. I posed my scorecard awhile back and no-one countered it with any even 2 pt difference scorecard let alone a draw or a win for Ali.

To counter that, those that say Ali never beat Norton have a fair argument but I see no problem with Ali getting a close win in their rematch.

dempseyfire wrote:The third Norton fight wasn't close at all, Frazier was just hoping for a 4th Ali fight. One of, and maybe the worst, robbery for a real championship in history. I posed my scorecard awhile back and no-one countered it with any even 2 pt difference scorecard let alone a draw or a win for Ali.

To counter that, those that say Ali never beat Norton have a fair argument but I see no problem with Ali getting a close win in their rematch.

Well that's an opinion. And then we have the results of the judges decision.

And I think your analysis of Joe's assessment is...an opinion. I would think Joe would want to be fair to his friend Kenny, You see it as somehow posturing for another Ali Payday. Both fair possibilities. Perhaps you and Joe just have a difference of opinion on your take of those events. (That's my opinion).

All possible I suppose, all subjective, and ultimately our individual take on things.

I don't see it as being the greatest train robbery...but many here do. Even granberry saw this one as close.....whereas he describes the Young fight as a one sided beatdown of course.

The more I check the record, the more it remains the same.


Based on this it would be interesting to pull a council together, reviewing the 100 most controversial fights and do some sort of an official rewrite of history. I want it to be 8 people of equal bias on both sides, with ME as the deciding vote in all the close ones.

Then and only then will these sorts of controversies be settled.

LOL

Yes, it is an opinion, Buzz. An opinion Ali himself agrees with --- he lost the third Norton fight.

Well then, Ali and Joe have found something they agree upon!


Goodnight...I guess I have to ask, is the participants opinion the final say on such things in your estimation? Or only the final say if they are showing humility?

Is this equal to Sugar Ray's revelation on the Hearn's fight? Or is this one a bit closer?

No, it cannot be considered the final say in things, IMO. However, it goes a long, looong way with me. No one has more pride than a fighter, & for one to admit he lost a fight he won --- especially the way Ali did it (immediately, rather than long after the fact, ala Leonard or Chavez) carries a tonne of weight with me.

Ironically, it hardly matters in this instance. Norton won the fight hands-down, & nothing anyone could ever say can change what happened that night --- simply, & with conviction, if one knows how to score a Boxing match, they will score the fight for Norton. It was that clear.

Well, that aint necessarily so.

But I hear ya.

Lets open score the Third Norton-Ali fight.....again :)

Robinson wrote:Lets open score the Third Norton-Ali fight.....again :)

Nah, I say we re-open the scoring for Ali-Norton II again. Is Davey boy still around? His card for that fight is the stuff of legend

The second one is the only one close enough to bother scoring. I had it a draw.

I shall dig up my scores for them.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:The second one is the only one close enough to bother scoring. I had it a draw.

Last time we scored it, one of Ali's biggest critics here (A Granberry lackie) came up with a 10-1-1 scorecard for Norton, complete with a round-by-round breakdown. It was every bit as golden as you might imagine

I dont think the margin was that wide. Though he did have it
for Norton. I could see the argument for having it scored slightly
for Norton, as I did have it a close draw and one round I was
tempted to make a 10-8 for Ken.

And Dave is not a Granberry lacky.

What was the score again? 119-110, or 119-109 or something?

I dont know. Dig up the thread.

I know it has become legend here though
with Collins roaring often about it :)

I haven't watched it in forever, I just remember scoring it a draw on more than one occasion. Ali was brilliant early and Norton was hammering him late.

Ali - Norton III was a huge robbery imo. I can not for the life of me understand how anyone can score that fight close, I had it 11-4 for Norton.
I scored the second fight a draw but as usual with Ali I would have liked to see a few points deducted, making it a close win for Norton.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I haven't watched it in forever, I just remember scoring it a draw on more than one occasion. Ali was brilliant early and Norton was hammering him late.

Futch says it was entirely Norton fighting the wrong gameplan which made Ali look so good, & when he, "got Norton back on the track," the results began to come again. Futch says he didn't have Norton's ear until the fifth round.

A brief YouTube search brought up nothing, so no. A reporter says to Ali, "You don't look very happy, more like you lost than you won" (paraphrase). Ali replies with a laconical, "Yeah, I lost."

I think had Ali never lost, he woulda been in the same boat as Marciano. The 49-0 makes The Rock the most over rated, yet the most under rated, in HW history---over rated cus he never lost, under rated as to his era and opposition. If Ali never lost his speed or reflexes or a fight either one, I think he'd still be a huge puzzle, like he was in the 1960's where many said he was fast, but not a great fighter