BoxRec

Today in youtube.com I saw the Ali vs Norton II fight. I have not seen this fight, only clips of it, but this time, I saw it to its entirety. Norton to me won ALL THE FIGHTS!!!

What kind of fight the judges were watching?....I got to tell Dave that he was RIGHT. Granberry, you are right also, this guy Ali was somebody that could not lose by decision...you had to Kill him to win!!!

As sad as this sounds I have this full fight but I have yet to watch it in its entirety.

You have now inspired me to watch it and try to judge for myself it tonight.

Ali & Norton signing for their second fight, with them is Don Fraser.

edit

West Coast sports writer Jim Murray said of the 2nd Ali-Norton fight,

"If Ali won this fight, then Japan won World War Two."

Think we can petition to have it changed? Or is it too late?

Can we keep all the hate and poison in this thread and stop polluting 'the greatest thread' ever?

granberry wrote:

Collins2000 wrote:Can we keep all the hate and poison in this thread and stop polluting 'the greatest thread' ever?

That's rich, coming from the spiteful, womanish bitch of boxrec.

You won't find me polluting "the greatest thread ever" with made up pathetic stories, granberry.

I laughed my ass off when they called you out as a fraud and low life. Hilarious.

Did you actually think real boxing guys were gonna fall for your lame act?

Collins2000 wrote:

granberry wrote:

Collins2000 wrote:Can we keep all the hate and poison in this thread and stop polluting 'the greatest thread' ever?

That's rich, coming from the spiteful, womanish bitch of boxrec.

You won't find me polluting "the greatest thread ever" with made up pathetic stories, granberry.

I laughed my ass off when they called you out as a fraud and low life. Hilarious.

Did you actually think real boxing guys were gonna fall for your lame act?

so continuous the debate in typical fashion

Anyone who says this fight was a genuine robbery is an out-&-out moron, simple as that. The fight was razor close. I had it 6-5-1 Ali. You could score it either way, which in fact precludes it from being a robbery.

Elmer, I know you said you wouldn't be surprised if Norton won the fight before you saw it, & YouTube isn't as reliable to score from as a DVD copy, typically...you sure you didn't let your pre-conceptions creep up on you? Not saying you did, just checking.

In no way, shape or form could this fight be considered a robbery. Granberry once said, "Relying on YouTube is pathetic." Interesting to note she has nothing to say to Elmer along those lines in this case. Fraud

edit

Just another wild card in this discussion. Have you ever actually been to a fight, that you later watched on TV? Did you notice that the camera can show things that you did not see or vice versa? I think when you are front row you actually get a better feel than if you are viewing from a camera.

So...this adds a bit to the mix....since judges are ring side. I think this difference often accounts for difference of opinion.

ALSO have you ever watched a full fight from one camera angle...and then watched the SAME COMPLETE FIGHT from another camera angle? ON a close fight it could be the difference between who YOU thought won the fight.

I'm just sort of reminding you to be humble when you make broad sweeping assumptions.

DaveV17 wrote:Irene wrote:
"Anyone who says this fight was a genuine robbery is an out-&-out moron, simple as that. The fight was razor close. I had it 6-5-1 Ali. You could score it either way, which in fact precludes it from being a robbery."


That is your opinion. Are you an Ali fan? IMO, to score the fight 6-5-1 Ali, one would have to be partial to Ali. It was not close and it was a robbery. The third fight was also a robbery. Ali got a lot of gifts from judges. It is good that more people are seeing the truth.

Dave,

Members of The Religion Of Ali (buzz, collins, irene, etc.)

get HYSTERICAL if anyone does anything other than GROVEL for their hero.

Their agony is evident on this thread.

The pathetic members of The Religion of Ali demand a ONE-WAY COMMUNICATION.

If they see the slightest deviation from their Thomas Hauser Talking Points

they get absolutely hysterical.

In the 60s and 70s Ali was adored by the media, the boxing establishment, all of pop culture, and most boxing fans. Any decision that could go his way did. Ali never had to fight hard and go for the knockout when he was behind, he could hold his opponent and win rounds. Ali should be evaluated differently than other fighters because he fought under different rules.

"There is a level of cowardice lower than that of the conformist: the fashionable non-conformist."
-Ayn Rand

I share the feeling that '70s Ali got plenty of help from the judges, but I watched Ali-Norton II just a week or two ago and I didn't have any problem with that decision. I didn't see how Norton was "dominating" in the rounds when Ali danced, as I someone said in this thread. I mean I don't have my round-by-round right here to look at, but I gave it to Ali.

The third fight, totally different story.

It seems that Ali's haters like him more than his fans do; I'm bored to death talking about Ali, while some of you seem to be willing to spend the rest of your lives talking only about him.

Rather than going into a long rant, I'll just say that I make no pretenses about Ali-Norton I and Ali-Norton III; I thought Ali lost both fights. But I had Ali winning 6-5-1 in the second Norton fight, and I gave the closer rounds to Norton. This thread is yet another example of Ali being singled out for no apparent reason, other than the fact that some enjoy demagoguery and like the attention that they receive when they cite the false "Ali got special treatment" mantra. Ali lost four decisions, so spare me that. It just seems like the fashionable thing to do today to knock all of Ali's achievements and credit them to the "boxing establishment" and their supposed protection of him. In this thread John Galt (maybe one of dave's aliases), for example, suggests that Ali was protected by that establishment in the 60's; I don't think I need to point out what's wrong with that claim.

I Feel Fine wrote:
In this thread John Galt (maybe one of dave's aliases), for example, suggests that Ali was protected by that establishment in the 60's; I don't think I need to point out what's wrong with that claim.

The newest "technique" of the Members of The Religion of Ali on boxrec

is accuse anyone/everyone who doesn't grovel for their Thomas Hauser talking points

of all being the same person.

Collins did it on the West Coast (La Raza) thread.

Now ifeellikeafairy does it here.

Are they the same person?

LOL

Well I didn't claim that you are part of the hydra, granny. I think you are quite distinct in your lunacy.

As for the matter at hand; I had Ali losing the third fight to Norton. I therefore show that I can be objective, and that I can score a close fight for an Ali opponent. You, on the other hand, seem unable to give Ali credit for anything. How can you claim to have any legitimacy as a scorer, granny, when you don't seem at all capable of scoring a close fight for Ali? Have you ever scored one relatively close fight for Ali? Just one? I'm guessing not.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Anyone who says this fight was a genuine robbery is an out-&-out moron, simple as that. The fight was razor close. I had it 6-5-1 Ali. You could score it either way, which in fact precludes it from being a robbery.

Elmer, I know you said you wouldn't be surprised if Norton won the fight before you saw it, & YouTube isn't as reliable to score from as a DVD copy, typically...you sure you didn't let your pre-conceptions creep up on you? Not saying you did, just checking.

In no way, shape or form could this fight be considered a robbery. Granberry once said, "Relying on YouTube is pathetic." Interesting to note she has nothing to say to Elmer along those lines in this case. Fraud

It's not a hard fight to score. I had it 7-5 Ali. Only a hater could score it like dave and dear old granberry.

fight number two between these men, I have yet to see in it's entirety, but when I do, it is one I would love to score...I do stand firm though on the first and third fights I have seen in full: Norton won them both hands down.

granberry wrote:

DaveV17 wrote:Irene wrote:
"Anyone who says this fight was a genuine robbery is an out-&-out moron, simple as that. The fight was razor close. I had it 6-5-1 Ali. You could score it either way, which in fact precludes it from being a robbery."


That is your opinion. Are you an Ali fan? IMO, to score the fight 6-5-1 Ali, one would have to be partial to Ali. It was not close and it was a robbery. The third fight was also a robbery. Ali got a lot of gifts from judges. It is good that more people are seeing the truth.

Dave,

Members of The Religion Of Ali (buzz, collins, irene, etc.)

get HYSTERICAL if anyone does anything other than GROVEL for their hero.

Their agony is evident on this thread.

The pathetic members of The Religion of Ali demand a ONE-WAY COMMUNICATION.

If they see the slightest deviation from their Thomas Hauser Talking Points

they get absolutely hysterical.

Nonsense, I like Ali for his actual achievements...the measurable outcomes....not for some sort of "rock star sentiment" that you would pin on. Probably for the same reasons you like Young....you liked what you saw in his actual performance. The fact that we come to different conclusions only seems to bother you.....does not bother me one iota. In fact Jimmy is one of my highly favored fighters. He had some of the same NATURAL TALENT that Ali possessed. He did however go in a different direction with that god given talent....a direction that you indicate that you prefer.....and that's perfectly fine for me. Jimmy is in my top ten favorites....

You really should concentrate on explaining your own reasonings....and leave your imaginings out of the discussion. Unless you simply like sharing your fantasy's. There may be better forums than this for shared fantasy's.

I'm someone who had a multiple page debate with I Feel Fine regarding my thought that one could score the rematch a close win for Norton. However, it was very close . . a one pt win for Ali is not outrageous. Dave has such a hard-on for "breaking" boxing mainstream opinion and anything positive about Ali . . only two rounds for Ali? That's just stupid. . . .Gran, we all know his line.

The 3rd fight I will say, and have always said . . .CLEAR win for Norton. By far the biggest "robbery" of an Ali opponent . . much worse than Young-Ali.

edit

im sorry, but i dont see Norton "clearly" winning that... A Fan or Anti see's only what he wants to see sometimes

To not score the first 3 rounds to Ali is complete and utter bias. Ali was successfully sticking and moving while Norton mainly just followed and missed. I won't even get to the rest of that scorecard.