A big argument that occurs on this forum is quality of wins. And often the old v young debate is brought up. And often fighters don’t get enough...
You’re a liar and strange guy. I get it your world view of a fighter you love is challenged and you don’t like it. I don’t converse with liars...
I never heard that. Although I did hear Norton was knocked down three times in the fight. Despite it being competitive.
No hw. At least according to boxrec. Maxim was over the limit for Patterson.
Please stop tagging me in posts. Why would you want to discuss anything with someone so dishonest?
Maxim was over the hill and on a losing streak. And beat a good up and comer. Please stop stalking me it’s getting weird.
Walcott Bivins Sheppard Satterfield Muscato Patterson Nardico To name a few
Ezzard Charles x2 Joey Maxim x2 Jimmy Bivins Elmer Ray x2 Lee Q Murray Joe Baksi Curtis Sheppard x2 Harold Johnson Lee Oma Unlike Norton no need...
Yeah I let him rub me the wrong way. I’ll have a cranberry juice and get over it. I don’t hate Norton I really dont. Maybe it rubs me the...
If you’re placing Norton top 20 obviously that’s placing him amongst the best ever. You’re a waste of time. You’ve done nothing but attempt to...
I think top 20 is a huge stretch…so much so you’d have to ignore so many other guys accomplishments. The Harry Wills, Tommy Loughran, Joe...
Who did Norton beat in those seven years? See context is everything. Had he fought Lyle or Bonavena or Frazier he probably losses.
Once again you bring zero substance to an argument. You can’t answer the argument so you come to your own odd conclusions. Like I “love” the 30s...
So does Ezzard Charles drop several ranks because of all his losses? I’m sure you don’t rate Holyfield that way. Losses like wins have context....
It definitely is. This isn’t an attempt to put down Norton but an opportunity to better see how he compares to others. I don’t think it makes...
