When Norton had to find a new trainer after Eddie Futch went with Joe he was interviewing Bill Slayton who ended up training him, Kenny had asked Slayton how felt about weight training. That would suggest you are correct about Norton lifting during his career.
No not personally but he had a chapter in a book about great trainers and Norton was one of his top fighters.
i have none reason to disbelief Norton. & not based simply on him having a good (but not huge develop massive) body. i think he has some weight training before doing boxing because he was athlete in school & college & in marines. but as pro boxing. no they is no reason to not believe.
But that's almost always the case with any kind of accusation. Some thieves are proven guilty because their crime was caught on film. Other thieves are caught because eyewitnesses identify them. Still others might be caught because they were found with the stolen property, or there was DNA evidence, or their shoe and fingerprints match the ones found in the victim's apartment. Or a hundred other possibilities. But they were all found doing the same kind of thing. If you wanted to prove that thefts were happening in Norton's and Lamotta's eras, you could appeal to all sorts of evidence. One other point: I think he's saying either weights or PEDs can give you that physique. So again, there are multiple factors you have to control for to eliminate both possibilities.
I mean, in @Journeyman92's defense, this guy does look weight trained. It's a bit hard to call to mind people who looked like this just from chemically-unassisted sessions of hitting the heavy bag, running, and pushups: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/a2/1a/87/a21a8787e4260eb0a4de215d4e5dc1a3.jpg https://www.notrecinema.com/images/usercontent/kpitalrisk/images/stars/121000/vign/v_118948.jpg https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/ks8AAOSwLnBX6whN/s-l500.jpg https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSHAqj3c55LP89AgsQpv_1eX7PVlybR3NyHsQ&usqp=CAU Heck, Norton repeatedly shows up in "most impressive boxing physique" threads, where his competitors are weight-trained fighters from the steroid era. (Some of whom have been caught using steroids even aside from the weight training.) And yet Norton is still frequently the guy picked as most impressive in that department. I'm not going to stridently argue for Norton weight training, but it's enough to make me suspicious he was exaggerating when he said he never touched a weight during his boxing career.
I’ve just coloured and italicised a sentence from last your last post. It’s actually what I’ve been saying all along…and JM92 didn’t suggest they “can”, rather, they “can only”. Accusations are a dime a dozen - some have some substance, others have none at all. Correctly or not, the simple point that I crystallised is that Norton is being accused “based on appearance” only - not by any evidence of action or witness to that action. The crime analogy doesn’t fit unless you go around accusing people simply and only because they “look”‘guilty of a type of a “crime” that other individuals otherwise have properly been proven guilty of committing. Now there can be other potential indicators to weight training/PED usage - but that’s exactly what they are - “other” indicators - they are not proofs based on mere, static appearance alone. I should reiterate that I don’t preclude some latter career weight work for Norton. Also, the claim to have never lifted a weight shouldn’t be taken literally - that would be impossible for any athlete, particularly given in Norton’s case given his varied physical applications of himself aside from boxing. I guess some people make a subjective call based on their level of training and commitment to determine the admission to, or rejection of, having done serious, muscle gaining weightlifting. Another fighter, Harold Johnson, also stated that he never lifted weights aside from holding dumbbells while shadowing boxing - something we can see James Jeffries himself doing on the old films from way back when.
If @Journeyman92 is correct that a clean fighter can only look like Norton with weights, then why wouldn't Norton's appearance be enough on its own?
I’m not maligning JM92 for his opinion and he has every right to it - and it would probably be best discussed with him directly or not at all (which is fine, he might’ve said all he needs or wants to say on the matter) rather than interpreting his words. You’re hypothesising that JM92 can and has correctly determined weight work based only on physical appearance. Of course it would enough IF it was a fail safe, proven method for deductive assessment, (as you’ve framed it ). That’s a circular, hypothetical argument, designed for a one option answer. And, tbh, I haven’t read an actual, considerate, specific breakdown as to how Norton’s appearance particularly reflects serious lifting of weights. Rather, there’s been a number of solid, specific counters to the argument - and the actual burden of proof doesn’t lie with those positing those counter arguments. A lot of the so called positive proof pivots on “Just look at the man and tell me he didn’t do weights” - which curiously and incorrectly shifts the burden of proof from the accusers by the act of asking for proof of a negative - meanwhile. the accusers, themselves, don’t have any actual positive proof for their argument. Per the optic test, I’ll repeat that Norton’s more favourable definition and proportions shouldn’t be confused with considerable accent on weight training and/or PED usage. The muscle mass that might raise suspicions simply isn’t there - even if Norton, when viewed in isolation, might given an illusory perception of same. Properly compared to other guys of similar natural frame in the ring, Norton simply appears that much better cut and proportioned imo. In fact, for all his cut appearance, it was actually surprising to see how much bigger Norton didn’t look in the ring as compared to the likes of the very soft bodied Jimmy Young. For possible indicators of serious weight training, look to the physical appearance of 6’2”, 254 lb Ken Jr - whose build was not as ideal as the old man’s but whose build arguably reflected that much more muscle mass. I say “arguably” to confine the assessment to “appearance “ - given his chosen sport and its training requirements/accents, it would likely be easily proven (in the material “act of”) that Ken Jr hit the weights in a big way. Anyway, I don’t know that I can add much more on this without falling into repetition. Personally I’m happy to jump off it. I’ll just link these photos of Sam McVey (pic at top left in particular). He was listed as having 16” arms - I would say that stat appears reasonably correct per the eye test. Ripped with similar upper arm cut/volume to Norton. It’s been mentioned that Sam lifted weights - I’m not privy to the details of same. Anyone know? Just as a heads up also - the site I’m linking to - Worthpoint - is a great source for many, old and rare boxing pics. https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/sam-mcvea-black-boxing-great-2147702423
If Norton was doing some hardcore weight lifting and steroid abusing, with an athletic 6'3 frame, he'd probably be a hell of a lot heavier than 205-215. Lifting heavy weights on a regular basis is going to add some serious muscle and will make you heavier. Norton also said he would walk around at 230+ and cut weight while "starving himself" in order to get to his ideal weight for stamina. It doesn't make logical sense for Norton to be losing weight and bulking up simultaneously. Norton wasn't even that big for a guy his height. There's a difference between having a ripped physique/defined muscle and having dense heavy bulky muscle. Even skinny guys can have a ripped physique without necessarily being huge. Norton wasn't "huge". Guys his own height such as Cobb, Ali, and Foreman look bigger and bulkier than him even though their physiques aren't as impressive and seemed physically stronger than Norton (which, again, is confusing if Norton was some sort of steroid abusing, hardcore weight lifter. How is he getting overpowered...?).
exactly he not even that big. not muscular developed more than many other heavyweight. normal size for 6'3 boxer heavyweight of era. i repeat same thing: muscle insertions & bone structure, size of joints, ratios , that make produce such as this aesthetic physique. Norton is shape more than size. is gifted with beauty of physique. bulging deltoid & big arm. but so has Ali. & other boxer. Ali had good physique too. but Norton is the best. this is life. This content is protected this men they did train very hard & eat lot protein. & build muscle. but boxing training hardcore on good specimen will do this. no reason to say must he be lift a weight. not at this size only 210 pound & 6'3. yes for normal skinny 6'3 man: lift the weight. but good athlete rare specimens. outlier elites. no not necessarily lift a weight . not for this size only.
Just gonna throw it out there Harold Johnson was like 165lbs according to himself. He put coins and weights in his pockets. He’s not big at all.
Personally, I believe it’s possible without weights but do you think Harold’s physical appearance suggested that did any serious lifting? Harold’s arms were listed as 16” also. This is one of my fave photos: Archie and Harold, - Moores’ arms (upper arms and forearms) were like tree trunks. For what it’s worth, Arch looked like he would’ve had a lot of sheer muscle strength. https://www.thefightcity.com/aug-11-1954-moore-vs-johnson-boxing/
yes ... & Norton is only 205 in second Ali fight. & 5 inch taller as Harold Johnson only 40 pound different on 5 inch taller frames. is normals
