Norton, not just a paper champ.

Recently for one reason or another I've seen norton's name mentioned quite a lot, some saying he wasn't a great victory for foreman nor holmes, some saying he wouldn't cut it in today's division, some saying he was too chinny to be a great and some saying he was just a paper champ.

I thought I'd look into this notion that Norton was just a glorified paper champ and I reached the conclusion it's utter bs.

In fact, I'd say that between 76 and 78, Norton was the best heavyweight on the planet.

I have just now watched his fights vs Young and Ali 3. Young I agreed with the verdict that norton edged a close fight.

Here is a report on it I found linked on boxrec where they discuss the hope that there'll be a 4th fight between ali and norton, so even at the time it was app[arent that there was unfinished business.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=3tEpAAAAIBAJ&sjid=P8oEAAAAIBAJ&pg=2519,1878630

The Ali fight I thought was a close but clear victory for Kenny

A-N

1: 10-9 - good first round by ali, landing good shots and staying ut of range for the most part.
2: 9-10 - clear norton round with ali seeming unable to avoid the shots from his awkward stance.
3: 9-10 - close round, but norton was the ring general and i preffered his big shots to ali's shoe shining.
4: 9-10 - another close round, norton seemd the general and was able to land his big right throughout the round, finishing quite strongly
5: 9-10 - ali trying to rope a dope but just getting tagged at will by norton in quite a 1 sided round.
6: 9-10 - ali fights a bit better at some points keeping norton at rage, but he just as no answer for his wild attacks and loses another clear round.
7: 10-9 - ali opened up more looking in control, norton was able to land a couple of looping rights but not enough to steal the round.
8: 9-10 good work closing ali down and really good mix of body shots and head shots by nroton.
9: 10-9 - dominant round by ali, really controlled the action from the outside making norton look quite poor at times.
10: 10-9 - ali seemed to take this round off but norton did even less. good finish by norton in the last 10 seconds but it was too little too late to nick the round.
11: 10-9 - very good action round, ali landing at will for the most part with sustained combos, good finish by norton but again, too little too late.
12: 9-10 - close round but i think norton showedsuperior defence and aggression plus his shots were much more effective imo.
13: 9-10 - great round, very action packe with the two trading shots but it can't be denied that norton is the bigger puncher in this fight and his sots are having much more effect than the blocked shots being thrown by ali.
14: 9-10 - another good round, ali visibly tiring now so having to stand and trade much more which gives the edge to the harder punching norton, ali still is unable to avoid the looping lefts and resorts to just covering up when he takes the big body combos.
15: 10-9 - all the hard shots came from norton at the end but it doesn't negate the 2 minutes plus of nothing as he was controlled by ali's outside jab and footwork.


141-144

for people to judge him on the fact that spinks chose to fight ali instead is ridiculous. After being battered by Foreman he regrouped well with a stoppage over Quarry and a revenge beating over Garcia. This combined with his two close fights with Ali previous meant he was well deserving of a title shot.

He showed a great chin and brilliant offensive awareness against Ali in the rubber stamp and I'm convinced he deserved the decision, he often made ali stand and trade and often came out on top landing huge haymakers and vicious body combos.

The night he fought Holmes I'm convinced it was a fight between the two best heavyweights in the world as by that point Ali's decline had taken him out of the reckoning for who was the best out there.

I wasn't around in the late 70's but I've seen a lot of the fights and it is clear to me that from 76-78 Norton performed better than anyone out there against better opposition. Plus he was robbed against Ali, he should have been the legitimate champ up until he lost to Norton in the great war.

People saying he was just a paper champ need to watch the rubber with Ali as this was a passing of the torch moment to see who the premiere HW in the world was

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gsmav9eao0E[/ame]

what do you guys think? was Norton robbed that night against Ali? should he have been the world champion until he lost to Holmes? Is there a valid argument that Ali/Spinks were better heavyweights in 1978?

 

you think so? it was a very close fight but I can't see anyone calling it a robbery.

 

haha yeah to be pedantic that's what i meant, from the ali rubber to the norton war.

 

Young was very elusive in the head hunting department but after watching a few of norton's fight I do believe his body attack is very underrated, he mixed it up superbly and somehow got away with throwing wild swinging hooks.

 

Thank you.

The fight he fought in the rubber was brilliant and he deserved the victory definitely.

For people to dismiss him as the only man to never win a title fight just reeks of ignorance.

 

There is no way of knowing if holmes would have won in 86 and we certainly can't judge another fighter based on this assumption.

How did you score norton-ali 3? Do you think he deserved the decision?

Imo he did outshine them because he did deserve the victory against ali that night.