Ali/Norton 3: Horrendous Robbery ?

No, so why are you? Frazier got up 8 times by the way.

I should've said elite, and was going to, being as Ellis was toward the end of his career when Shavers surprised him in the first. I don't think it quite makes up for all of his stoppage losses to the likes of Cobb, Mercado, Lyle, Quarry, etc. These guys were there to bang with him(not seen the Mercado fight) and survived his initial onslaught only to put him out later.

Simply put, Shavers was not a great fighter either, and any ELITE HW should've beaten him. You also admit in a later post that Norton did indeed freeze up on punchers. Well, regardless of whether or not Frazier lost to Foreman, he never froze up on punchers, he simply faced about as bad a styles matchup as you could think of and got stopped. In the rematch he actually boxed quite well before being stopped in the 5th, I'd take that Frazier over Shavers any day.

Frazier had been retired for years prior to that comeback, whereas Norton showed flashes of his best just prior to the Shavers KO loss in his war with Holmes. You can't compare this stuff. Compare the two fighter's careers, that's a better way to go about it. Norton lost to pretty much every big puncher he faced, Frazier lost to one. Norton has his wins over a faded Ali to back him(with the occasional Quarry or Young), Frazier has quite a bit more.

My point is, by comparing him to Frazier you're not taking a lot of things into account, and you really have only one thing to compare them with, the losses to Foreman. I don't see the comparison in the same light as you do.

I wouldn't say his chin was much worse, I'd say what has been said time and again, that he froze up against the big hitters.

 

Superb post.

 

The only ones I can remember seeing on ESPN Classic of Norton were the loss to Foreman and Norton's brutal torture of Quarry.

They showed the Ali fights on Versus a little while back.

 

Which was the biggest robbery do you think, Ali-Norton III or Louis-Walcott?

 

Nice post.

I would like to add by saying that the first Foreman vs Frazier fight could have had a different outcome if Frazier treated Foreman with the same respect and determination to training that he paid to Ali. Frazier was far from prime shape when he fought Foreman, tried to win on ability alone and was knocked around the ring in the process.

Mercante's job was nothing to write home about either because he let Foreman push, shove and grab Frazier's shoulders instead of forcing him to fight by the rules which means boxing or moving out of the clinches. Regardless of opinion, nobody should discredit Foreman for his wins against Frazier. He made sure to not let him get close and get warmed up. He boxed smartly and carefully the second time against Frazier even when Joe was wearing contact lenses and could barely see. This is the Foreman that I'd never bet against because that looked like his best performance post Ali and post Lyle.

 

Just watched Ali-Young, and in no way shape or form was that a robbery (even if the margin that two of judges had in Ali's favour was horrendous). It was a very close fight and a draw would have been alright since neither fighter did enough to win IMO.

But it absolutely wasn't a robbery. For one thing you don't win the HW-title by sticking your upper body through the ropes when the other guy is unloading on you. Young actually took a count for this in the end of the 12th round. Since it was scored on the 10 point must-system, that might have clinched it for Ali in my book. Very close fight.

Please, don't let hear anything about robbery ever more concerning this fight. Sure, the judges gave Ali the benefit of a doubt, but that was all. No one can say that fight completely belonged to Young. He just didn't do enough.

 

it proves that norton deserved to be champion at that time and that Holmes beat the real linear champion in 1978

 

You can debate whether it was robbery or not till the cows come home, what you can't debate is how bad Ali looked in the fight, he was obviously a shot fighter at this time.

 

No, that is not up for debate. I don't know if he was shot so much as just lazy, though. He was very underprepared for that fight. It's really just another testiment to that he should've quit after Manilla.

I would like to see a younger, better prepared Ali against Young, though. If feel that Young would have presented Ali with difficulties at any stage of his career, actually. He was very, very slick.

 

Shavers-Ali was a robbery. I don't care if Earnie says he lost.

Shavers won 9 rounds.

 

I watched it today and does not agree at all. It was close and hard fought, but Ali won it with 2 rds margin IMO. The commentators of the fight (Norton and another guy) doesn't seem to feel Shaver's should have won it anymore than Shavers himself did.

 

Regardless of how Kenny fared against big punchers, the fact remains that he was robbed in the third Ali fight. Kenny was Ali's kryptonite, more so than even Frazier due to his style,jab and size. The powers that be in Boxing at that time knew that Ali was still the biggest draw in the HW division and that if he lost to Norton in that fight he probably wouldn't be able to beat Kenny a 4th time. Since Norton didn't have the drawing power or charisma of Ali, a close fight would go to Ali whether or not he truly deservrd it. I think in some ways the sport did a disservice to Ali by giving him a few too many "gifts" during the tail end of the 70's. Those gifts enabled Ali to continue fighting and absorbing more punishment than he should've taken at that point in his career which probably led to the way he is now. After his "win" against Shavers, Teddy Brenner made a statement saying that he would no longer promote Ali in New York for his own good. If that's not a wakeup call then I don't know what is. Manila should've been Ali's last fight. Talk about a great way to end a fantastic career. But sadly he went on. Brett Favre...are you listening?