BoxRec

Have I posted this topic before?

I saw all 3 fights and I gotta say that Ken Norton had the great Muhammad Ali's number...To me, Norton won all those fights. Your comments.

You're clueless.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:You're clueless.

Clueless? I saw all the fights...Norton won all of them in my view.

Which is a reasonable viewpoint.

Maintaining the second fight was won so convincingly by Norton that he was robbed is, as I say, clueless.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Which is a reasonable viewpoint.

Maintaining the second fight was won so convincingly by Norton that he was robbed is, as I say, clueless.

Excuse me sir, but in my view, my view, Norton won that second fight also. The judge$$$$$ got paid under the table or something. You are not gonna make the buck$$$ with Norton.

elmersalsa wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Which is a reasonable viewpoint.

Maintaining the second fight was won so convincingly by Norton that he was robbed is, as I say, clueless.

Excuse me sir, but in my view, my view, Norton won that second fight also. The judge$$$$$ got paid under the table or something. You are not gonna make the buck$$$ with Norton.

Which is why Norton lost the third fight (which he should've been given). He may well have won the second fight --- it was very tight, & it wouldn't surprise me if Ali got the nod because he was Ali. To say Norton won it wide enough that he was robbed is, well...clueless.

Norton won the 1st and the 3rd fights, no doubt about it.

#2 was very close, but do you think Ali and what he meant for boxing was going to get the short end of that stick?

I'm okay with Ali winning fight #2.

yancey wrote:Norton won the 1st and the 3rd fights, no doubt about it.

#2 was very close, but do you think Ali and what he meant for boxing was going to get the short end of that stick?

I'm okay with Ali winning fight #2.

Any competent judge would be.

Norton-Ali II is similar to Pacquao-Marquez II. Having it razor thin for either man is perfectly acceptable.

I do think Ken was robbed blind in the rubber match.

dempseyfire wrote:Norton-Ali II is similar to Pacquao-Marquez II. Having it razor thin for either man is perfectly acceptable.

I do think Ken was robbed blind in the rubber match.

Even Ali admitted as much. Only Ali's staunchest admirers make the same nauseatingly shallow argument Norton, "didnt finish strong," (LOL).

So in light of all the consensus which is Norton won the series. Why in your opinions is it so hard to rate Norton as a top 12 all time HW for many? Is it because most of you feel the 60s Ali/Clay would have done far better with Norton.

Let me put it this way how do you guys see a peak 60s version of Ali doing with Norton in 3 fights?

Personally I feel Ali was in his prime, albeit a different kind of prime in the 70's. He was more experienced, had a better chin and different ways to beat a man. What he had lost i speed he had made up for in the areas he improved in.

I think the first fight is the clearest.

The second fight is very close. I think I scored it a draw. I think it’s open to debate.

The third fight… I tell you. Norton wins his rounds very easily. But there are rounds when nothing happens. Norton just stands off and a slow motion Ali just flicks a jab at the air in front of Norton. Truth is Norton could have stopped him had he stepped it up. But it seems to me like every heavyweight in the world was wary of being rope-a-doped right up until Tyson hit the scene. I still think Norton won BUT Ali wins more rounds than you think because Norton does nothing.

I think Norton always has a chance with Ali. He could catch a jab and often, unexpectedly, hooked with the left when you expect a jab. This would always make him tricky for Ali.

I had it fights 1 & 3 for Norton and Ali winning fight 2.

CBS sponsored a star studded after the fact judging of the third fight, and the panel called it a draw. Frazier gave the fight to Norton by 1 round and did not call it a robbery. The cries of "robbery" by the Norton rumpswabs should be tempered by that alone.


It was close..Ali did seem to collect every close round.

BoxBuzz wrote:CBS sponsored a star studded after the fact judging of the third fight, and the panel called it a draw. Frazier gave the fight to Norton by 1 round and did not call it a robbery. The cries of "robbery" by the Norton rumpswabs should be tempered by that alone.


It was close..Ali did seem to collect every close round.

If you judge the fight as one big 15 round lump. It's a very clear 10-9 victory for Kenny. But over 15 rounds there are cantos in which Norton does nothing.

I would agree with that..

A guy can win 8 rounds just barely, and get his ass handed to him for 7 and still "win" a fight under the rounds rule.

BoxBuzz wrote:I would agree with that..

A guy can win 8 rounds just barely, and get his ass handed to him for 7 and still "win" a fight under the rounds rule.

You dont even know who won Ali-Young. No surprise you cant score this fight.

Ezzard wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:CBS sponsored a star studded after the fact judging of the third fight, and the panel called it a draw. Frazier gave the fight to Norton by 1 round and did not call it a robbery. The cries of "robbery" by the Norton rumpswabs should be tempered by that alone.


It was close..Ali did seem to collect every close round.

If you judge the fight as one big 15 round lump. It's a very clear 10-9 victory for Kenny. But over 15 rounds there are cantos in which Norton does nothing.

The subtext being this isnt the case at stages with Ali?

BoxBuzz wrote:CBS sponsored a star studded after the fact judging of the third fight, and the panel called it a draw. Frazier gave the fight to Norton by 1 round and did not call it a robbery. The cries of "robbery" by the Norton rumpswabs should be tempered by that alone.


It was close..Ali did seem to collect every close round.

IMO it wasn't close at all. The absolute best I can do for Ali is 9-6 Norton. The second fight was close, no 1 and 3 wasn't. I also think Norton had Alis number and would have given him fits at any stage of his career.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:I would agree with that..

A guy can win 8 rounds just barely, and get his ass handed to him for 7 and still "win" a fight under the rounds rule.

You dont even know who won Ali-Young. No surprise you cant score this fight.

Your unkindness knows no limits....lol. Anyway I went right over to the record book and it indicates again today that Ali won. Care to file an appeal? lol

Like I said, maybe none of the judges were easy on that ol' peek a boo out the ring maneuver of Young's. I'm sure you would have given him extra credit for his "thinking outside the ring".

However, I always know, that whenever I want to know what's what...I can always use the search button and find out your opinion on any given fight and VOILA!!! Illumination is certain!

Norton clearly won 1 & 3, the second was a draw in my eyes.

BoxBuzz wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:I would agree with that..

A guy can win 8 rounds just barely, and get his ass handed to him for 7 and still "win" a fight under the rounds rule.

You dont even know who won Ali-Young. No surprise you cant score this fight.

Your unkindness knows no limits....lol. Anyway I went right over to the record book and it indicates again today that Ali won. Care to file an appeal? lol

Like I said, maybe none of the judges were easy on that ol' peek a boo out the ring maneuver of Young's. I'm sure you would have given him extra credit for his "thinking outside the ring".

However, I always know, that whenever I want to know what's what...I can always use the search button and find out your opinion on any given fight and VOILA!!! Illumination is certain!

Not for the first time, I dare you to explain which rounds Ali won, and how he outscored Young in them.

Thats consistently enough to end this debate. The last time I made this offer, in a thread which happily had three or four pro-Ali campaigners chattering away about Young's tactics, I became suddenly invisible. LOL.

"Young kept sticking his head through the ropes and got what he deserved," is the only rationale I can recall hearing in years of posting across multiple forums. Ali fans cant afford to draw attention to the fighting, because they know they cant get near coming up with eight rounds for Ali. Theyd be lucky to come up with eight right hands for Ali.

Unless Im jumping the gun, and Buzz can offer us something just a hair more convincing than, "Well the record books have it as an Ali victory,"

A very good case can be made that Ken Norton should have been given the decision in all three bouts with Muhammad Ali. I thought that Norton got robbed in the third bout, which I saw on closed-circuit television.

Norton matched up well with boxers such as Ali, Larry Holmes and Jimmy Young, but stopped in very short order when he faced the big punchers like George Foreman, Earnie Shavers and Gerry Cooney. As a result, I believe that Norton would have also been knocked out in short order by Joe Frazier and Ron Lyle.

- Chuck Johnston

Chuck1052 wrote:A very good case can be made that Ken Norton should have been given the decision in all three bouts with Muhammad Ali. I thought that Norton got robbed in the third bout, which I saw on closed-circuit television.

Norton matched up well with boxers such as Ali, Larry Holmes and Jimmy Young, but stopped in very short order when he faced the big punchers like George Foreman, Earnie Shavers and Gerry Cooney. As a result, I believe that Norton would have also been knocked out in short order by Joe Frazier and Ron Lyle.

- Chuck Johnston

Frazier, yes, and you're not likely to get much argument there. I would contend thats a class issue more than a power one, though. Frazier was just too good for Norton.

Lyle? Highly debatable fight, IMO. Either man may win it. My argument is, while Norton clearly preferred boxers, the evidence actually in-ring against him on the charge he could never handle a puncher is more circumstancial than convincing, IMO.

Foreman? How many men in all of history would beat a peak Foreman? C'mon.

Shavers? Pretty well shot by this point of his career was Norton.

Cooney? Please. He wouldve kicked this guy all over the ring seven or eight years earlier.