¿Which of them do you think would give Prime Ali a more worthy fight?

Sure, it all changes and becomes “bait” every time your stupidity is called out. <Sneeze> “Cop out!”.

Again, you’re all over the place like a you know what’s you know what. You’re posting like an emotional wreck.

So it’s my mask that’s slipping, tell us more Kami come JourneyMan come Who Am I?

Your complete lack of any self awareness is hysterical, “Aye”.

You’re putting out collective insults to a number of posters in Classic - because, of course, you know better than most…..

You’re a pathetic little man, still shooting up emergency flares for someone, anyone, to try and help you out. It is seriously cringe but it’s patently obvious that you can’t help yourself.

That little tactic backfired brilliantly before - now you’re trying to pretend that it didn’t happen - you made an absolute goose of yourself and everyone duly distanced themselves from you.

Who understands you? There has been many who tell you that they don’t, - it’s just not sinking in for you, is it?

But you’ve got 1 new friend it seems - so you better hang on to him for dear life.

So now, according to you, Norton isn’t a club fighter, he actually won ant least 2 out of 3 vs Ali (including a win for the all important title) and you still provided anything re your own asinine topic: Young wearing the cuffs.

So, no mistake, you’re a self admitted BS artist, only here to post inanities and waste time.

 

Yes, and the apologists for Ali are correct, for once, to point out the injury as a fluke. He eked out a win against a guy whose jaw he'd broken. Obviously a legitimate way to win, but not a repeatable path to victory, as the next two fights showed.

 

Stylistically, he specialized in mostly-losing close fights against "boxers" who lacked the power to hurt him. He made such fights close, but rarely did enough to win -- whether the opponent was an in-shape 1970s Ali, or the shot late 70s one.

 

No that’s only the facts shush.

 

He's also another guy like Jeffries who benefited by being the bigger, better athlete in many of his fights. By Ibeabuchi's and Tua's era, that level of athleticism was yesterday's news; even Holyfield could get it out of a test tube by then.

 

Your skepticism about Norton just shows you haven't watched his masterclass against near-ATG Ron Stander.

 

Well in fairness Ron Stander would be somewhere in his top 5-10 wins probably should watch it to fully evaluate the guy who probably beat a shot Ali and debatably Jimmy Young - thinking about it he might be a step BELOW Povetkin H2H in an overall sense let Futch be in his corner and who knows.

 

Others are right to point out the comparative lack of a jab, but I suppose you could reply that Frazier did it against 70s Ali with an injured arm that couldn't even throw a jab, one good eye, and a lot of determination.

 

I dunno. He'd have to be a pretty special fighter to defeat your actual uncle, to whom you are unironically related in real life.

 

In my heart Uncle Jim is the fighter of the 70s (aka the universe) with the right breaks he’d be the guy who defeated Lyle x 2, 70s Foreman, “Suga” Norton and Muhammad Ali can you name one fighter with a better hypothetical but almost happened resume?

 

Jimmy "Everyman's Uncle" Young is an acquired taste, like hundred year eggs.

 

Your response is textbook projection. You accuse me of being "disingenuous" while conveniently rewriting history. Norton-Young was a split decision that many observers, including the referee Carlos Padilla, thought Young won. It wasn't "clearly" Norton's fight as you falsely claim.

You're selective with your "could've gone either way" standard. You insist Norton "clearly" beat Young despite it being a controversial split decision, yet pretend that Holmes-Norton was a close controversial fight when it was a clear win for Holmes. Norton himself admitted he thought he was going to lose the Young decision before it was announced.

You still haven't named a single significant win demonstrating Norton's excellence against varied styles outside the Ali/Holmes fights. Just deflection, condescension, and moving goalposts.

The irony is striking you claim my analysis is "extremely shallow" while offering zero substantive response to my actual point about Norton's limited resume depth. Instead, you've shifted to debating scorecards and playing the "could've gone either way" game.

When you're ready to actually discuss Norton's resume depth rather than rehashing controversial decisions with double standards, let me know.

 

More projection and proving my point nice job!

 

Agree with the exception of Douglas. Buster pulled off what Norton couldn't, in beating down the prime, undisputed world champion to win the crown.

Whether we're playing by who was actually the better fighter at his best, or who has better "ATG" letters on his resume, Buster comes out comfortably ahead of Norton.

But yeah, Norton is in the same historical ballpark as guys like Quarry, Witherspoon, etc.

 

I'd rank Witherspoon higher tbh way more proven over a number of different styles of fighters