Ali norton 3 myth

I've always felt that this fight was very close and could have gone either way. A draw probably would have been a fair ruling, but it also would have pissed off the fans, and likely forced a 4th meeting. I think one poster mentioned a few months back that after the third Ali-Norton fight, Dr. Ferdie Pacheco took Ali asside, and they both agreed with one another, that he had lost and that it was time to call it quits. Of course Ali didn't call it quits and we all know the tragic ending.

 

I disagree there, fg2227.

Being champion is great, but that does not give you extra privileges in terms of getting the benefit of the doubt with scoring. If it's that close, you should go with what's on your card; you can't say: well, Ali made it really close on my card but he still lost it on a round to round basis, but you know what, he's the champ and you gotta take it from him so i'm reversing a round so that Ali retains it.

 

I watched that fight many times and I have a hard time counting enough rounds that Ali won. Take a good look at Ali's demeanor after the fight. Ali clearly looks like the beaten man while Norton's corner is echoing victory.
One lesson that every fighter should learn from watching Ali-Norton III is to fight every round until the final bell is sounded. Sure, Norton probably thought he had the decision in the bag after the 14th round but he should not have coasted assuming he get the decision.

Oscar Delahoya did the same thing against Felix Trinidad and was robbed of the decision, IMO. He coasted for the last three rounds while Trinidad started to land more right hand shots. I don't think Tito did enough to win that fight but the judges thought otherwise and gave it to him.

 

Norton got screwed. I thought he clearly won the fight.

 

Now THAT'S a myth.

 

Mercante and Lederman were judges that night, we know they scored it for Ali, so why the thread? :huh

 

Norton had the style to trouble Ali but Ali had the style to hold the title longer than Ken, Norton had one talent and that was to trouble Ali, he won the fight but the title belonged to Ali, Norton would have gotten KO"D by any of the Punchers in the division.

 

Yes but everyone 'knows' it was a UD. yet, your two 'experts' were judges. Why not use other examples?

 

Close but IMO Norton won.

 

It was so close, the panel that WWS had judge the bout a week after with Kenny present scored it a draw. Norton gave the last round and the win to Ali, he threw and landed one jab in the 1st minute, 2 in the second, then landed several good punches toward the end of the 3rd while Ali scored with light jabs in all three minutes. Kenny just blew it for no reason.

 

Very easy fight to score, Ali lost and it was not even close.

 

Hang on, the original poster's point is, "it wasn't a robbery because the judges say so"? Or am I missing something?

A generation of fight fans have grown up calling that one for Ken Norton.