How would history view Norton and Frazier if they never beat Ali?

Frazier would still be in the hall of fame. And viewed as a great. Norton would not. Without Ali trilogy his career would look more like an alphabet champ of the 80s say a pinklon Thomas or Trevor Berbick type

 

Norton tried to Frazier through Ali that night. His corner managed to get him to shake it off and use proven tactics. Futch said so, and I'm with him on this one.

Polls are a number of anonymous votes. If you ask whether Canelo-Golovkin III was in 12-0/10-2 range, majority will likely say yes. As populum fallacy unless scorecards are actually posted with some degree of insight.

IIRC I had Ali winning the first 3-4 rounds, Norton evening out, and then hectic last four rounds during which I could see somebody scoring for either man. I wouldn't raise an eyebrow if somebody scores the bout for Ali.

 

It's hard to say. We know that he was good enough to beat a good amount of the contenders out there, but that others, like Shavers, would blow him out, so it depends a bit on the order he gets to face them in.

 

Nah, I have him in the seven to nine range.

Without the FOTC, I'd drop him ten or so places.

 

Disagree with the answers I think Joe would be remembered as yet another HW champion that got destroyed by a great fighter in Foreman. This has happened throughout history where not so good HW champion lost his title to a truly great fighter. Louis - Braddock, Willard - Dempsey, Patterson - Liston. That Ali win is his only claim to the ATG status tbh. You guys are way off on this one

 

As I see it. Can’t take away from Joe what he already achieved. But unfortunately for Ken he’d have no Ali controversial/close fights to fall back on. He’d have a hell of a job getting the big fights without the Ali connection.

 

The same losers who ogle over Cleveland Williams would attach themselves to Norton because of his appearance. Apart from that no one is talking about Kenny- who did he really beat in the top ten anyways? Besides Ali. Shot Quarry? Frazier would have to be a different fighter- he pretty much always beats Ali when they’re both on point.

 

Yes.

 

Does anyone else here think he was slightly out of place in the film Champions Forever?

 

I thought Ken earned his slot in that film. Beating Ali once qualifies him.

 

Do you also agree with Futch that Norton wouldn't have beaten even a '70-'71 Ali?

"Would Norton beat the Ali of, say three years?"

"Definitely not." Futch said.

Source: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/72689280/albuquerque-journal/

On his site at least, thread starters are given the option to publicly reveal participants in a poll, which I chose to do. So you're incorrect this vote wasn't anonymous. As a matter of fact, despite Ali receiving nearly triple the votes as is, many who voted for Norton, commented in the thread, they only did so because they thought my thread was referring to their third fight.

 

Frazier, the unified champ would fall into this bunch? Really?

 

Unified against whom ?!?
He had no huge ATG wins before facing Ali.
Similar to Norton, his status was elevated simply due to him beating Ali.

 

Regardless the fact that he was the champion automatically puts him higher than Norton, Lyle, etc. No ands, if, or buts.

 

The only thing special about Frazier was his willingness. There was nothing special about Norton.
The defining thing about them was their part in the circular logic that is the Ali mystique: They are great fighters because they gave Ali hard fights and Ali is great because he beat them.
On their own merits, there is absolutely zero to distinguish either Norton or Frazier as great fighters. Everything about them has to be qualified through Ali, just as his merits are qualified through them.
You can throw Foreman into the mix as well because he is a huge part of the propaganda. There was nothing but hype about his first career and, for perspective, he was dropped by Jimmy Young. And Young is great because of...Ali.
None of those guys were any better than good.