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

Nice false narrative your agenda against me is painfully obvious you’d say anything to support it.

 

There’s no rewriting of history. I’m not unduly or “selectively” tethered to “official” decisions in terms of judging fights for myself.

Imo, while close, Norton still clearly beat Young, Norton wisely focusing in on the body than the more elusive head.

You stated the bleeding obvious, that it was an official SD win to Norton over Young, and…..?

Norton vs Holmes was also an official SD by much closer margins - so tell me genius, per your standard, are you trying to “rewrite” history even more so in respect of that fight?

Ali won a clear “official” UD over Norton in their rubber. My opinion: Norton won that fight and by a clear margin. See: robbery. In truth, a significant win and not least for the fact that it should’ve garnered Norton the HW title.

You still haven’t provided your “opinion” as to who won the aforementioned fight - has the cat got your tongue on that one? Of course it has when one posts as disingenuously as you do.

Usyk - Fury 1 was an SD. Some felt that a draw would’ve been more appropriate, others again felt that Fury nicked it. I felt that Usyk was a clear winner. Do you want align yourself with that official decision also? - not likely being the Usyk nuthugger that you are.

Refuting your none too bright positions is as easy as shooting fish in a barrel.

Ali and Holmes didn’t fight similar. Although they’re not the whole story for Norton, do you realise how dumb you read? Like: “Okay, you’ve got Ali and Holmes to uphold. So what? Anyone else to shine a light on?” Jesus.

Yes, among others there was also Young, a different style again - at his best, an awkward, slippery customer - a tough fight for anyone (1 x over Foreman, 2 x over Lyle etc.).

Some (many?) believe that Young beat Ali. I personally don’t agree - I think Ali still won that fight - but I don’t need to lie like “some” and call in the opinions of others to falsely support my overall argument.

Like your mate with whom you’re playing pathetic tag team, you’re talking out of your proverbial. Yes, the irony.

Your post is 100% failed rhetoric. I am both articulate and intelligent - realistically self aware - not a deluded wanker like yourself -

Let you know? Lol, another one of your major failings. First and foremost, my reply to that is - “Like, who cares? I’m not so interested in your opinions on anything”.

Secondly, despite your advertised ignorance , the relevant discussion has already been had - you’ve been routed - everyone knows you’re always in denial of same - making pointless, never ending addendums after the fact.

In lieu of acceptance, you just keep writing and writing and writing , desperately seeking the last word in an argument you have long since LOST - when far more equipped posters simply tire of you, you then stupidly claim that they’re “running” away - lol - no, the truth is, they eventually tire of dealing with a well beaten troll…..word!

 

Your post is full of such weird reassurance near half of your post is actually just telling yourself you definitely “won” a “fantasy” discussion based on opinions? “Trust me bro I’m so smart, articulate and self aware” self soothing init? lol Pugguy don’t be silly you’re a run of the mill boxing nerd like most of us, stop taking yourself so seriously you condescending man-child. “Aye?”

 

Impressive tantrum. You're right, you're not "unduly tethered to official decisions" you simply discard them when they don't fit your pre-written narrative. You claim Norton 'clearly beat Young' (a disputed split decision many thought Young won), but then Holmes-Norton (another razor-thin split) is just 'closer.' The only consistency is your bias.

My 'opinion' on Ali-Norton 3 or Usyk-Fury is irrelevant, and a pathetic attempt to deflect. The topic was Norton's resume depth beyond Ali and Holmes. You've named Young, a controversial SD, and that's it. Ali and Holmes are two styles, yes. Congratulations on that groundbreaking insight. What about other significant wins against varied top-tier opposition that build a case for him beyond those marquee (and mostly losing, officially) series? Still waiting.

Your entire meltdown is a masterclass in projection:

• You accuse me of being 'disingenuous' while conveniently ignoring disputed aspects of fights like Young-Norton to fit your argument.
  
  
• You complain about 'pointless rhetoric' while spewing paragraphs of insults, whataboutism (Usyk-Fury, really?), and self-congratulatory nonsense about your 'articulate and intelligent' self.
  
  
• You claim I'm 'routed' and 'seeking the last word' in a post where you are desperately trying to have the last, loudest, most insulting word.
  

This isn't a debate; it's you shouting down counterarguments with insults because you can't substantively address the core point about Norton's overall resume. If this is you 'routing' someone, I'd hate to see you actually try to make a coherent, evidence-based argument without resorting to calling people 'deluded wankers.'

The only thing 'routed' here is your ability to stay on topic and debate respectfully. But please, tell me again how 'well beaten' I am while you avoid the actual question. It's genuinely amusing.

 

Nothing screams smart like repeating I am smart 10 times and calling everyone who disagrees with you stupid.

 

Still such a pathetic little man. Replying on behalf of your new found mate. The Tweedle Tweedle Dum Tag Team. You can fight over who wants to be Dum - though you’re both equally eligible so best to take turns.

 

Weird for a smart guy eh? because I think he might not realise we probably agree on everything? - I’m not sure what he disagrees with which is why he is clutching to calling Norton a “Club Fighter” and how I said Young was in cuffs… both things I clarified lol what’s left? Does he disagree on anything relevant what’s he arguing about?

 

When your arguments completely fall apart, the playground insults against anyone who disagrees start flying. Calling people 'pathetic' and 'Tweedle Dum' doesn't magically bolster your argument, nor does it disguise your own desperation now that you're cornered with no factual rebuttals left. It's the classic sign of someone who has comprehensively lost the debate on substance and is now just lashing out in frustration. Thanks for making your lack of a real argument so glaringly obvious to everyone!

 

I think it’s pretty simple, he just can’t handle any pushback and refuses to process points that don’t fit his preconceived notions. Honestly, it’s classic midwit behavior, just enough smarts to sound confident, but not enough to genuinely engage or reconsider anything.

 

I’ve been there (just being honest) I’m also not like 30-40 years old and calling people “Tweddle dum” among other childish things for the late Ken Nortons honour but yes you’ve scored a hole in one.

 

Back to the relevant discussion does anyone else think that David Haye is so unorthodox, spazy and athletic that he could find Ali the way Enry Cooper did? Just a supercharged awkward fighter like that against another equally “odd” style I think it could get messy and he could be hit by something he didn’t see? Seems like a dangerous opponent, I wouldn’t rate his chances above “okay” but interesting to think about.

 

No tantrum. As if but you obviously wish. Anyone can see that. Pure deflection straight out of the gates.

And, as forecast, after being routed, the pointless addendums and attempts to last word it continue…on..and on….same ol’, same ol’…

No, I’m not unduly tethered to official decisions - but I did prove that you are only as and when it suits you.

Again, you have disingenuously referred to Norton’s “mostly losing” official record vs Ali and Holmes. Ken beat Ali clearly in fight 1, fight 2 could’ve gone either way and Norton clearly beat Ali in fight 3.

You’ve made no point merely repeating what I’ve already said to you - the diff. being me providing evidence while you’ve just parroted back at me with no meat.

Your opinions on both Ali-Norton and Fury are indeed both relevant as it pertains to the rationale behind your stated positions and convenient deference to “official” decisions - thus, you won’t touch those fights, especially Ali - Norton 3 which you are happy to include your statement re Norton “mostly losing” but now baulk on giving your own opinion as to who actually deserved the won - because that is now somehow “irrelevant”?

Well, it needs no explaining as to why your rationale for refusing to provide your own opinion on those fights is illogical and simply deflective BS.

Your refusal to address the above is just another shameless cop out on your part - well done you.

So you’re claiming that you weren’t implying that Ali and Holmes weren’t of similar style?

Otherwise, you’re dismissing out of hand
Norton giving two stylistically different and multi applied ATGs all hell? And you’re also still ignoring Norton’s age and being past prime for Holmes. Wow.

And Norton did also beat Young clearly, and to repeat because it’s obviously not sinking in, Young was a different style altogether again as compared to Ali and Holmes.

Even falling back to Norton-Young being a very close fight for the SAKE of argument, that’s Norton still being absolutely competitive with another top contender.

Yeah, your analysis is shallow, weak and heavily biased….and yes, you have been routed - and what is truly hilarious is your pathetic tag team posting effort in tandem with your equally ill informed mate.

Btw, did you miss the part where I said I am not actually interested in your opinions on boxing…..? As I’ve also already said, you’re just a time waster….

 

Dee and Dum, at it again. Get yourselves a room already.

 

Again, just as forecast, more pointless addendums and last word freaking - exactly what you are known for.

I’ve won the debate - that ship has sailed - I simply don’t suffer fools like yourself gladly, especially when they’re in absolute denial, again, like yourself.

 

I agree that David Haye’s athleticism could give Ali problems, much like Henry Cooper did with his big shots. Haye’s speed and power might catch Ali off-guard early, especially since Ali was occasionally clipped by quick punches from slower fighters. But I can only see Haye winning by getting a knockout but Ali’s chin was iron, and his ring IQ was unmatched. Haye might have success in spurts, but he lacks the technical finesse to outpoint Ali over 12 or 15 rounds. Once Ali decodes Haye’s blitzes he’d likely neutralize Haye’s attacks and cruise to a decision. Haye’s a dangerous wildcard, but Ali’s adaptability makes him the clear favorite in my view.