Ali vs Ali whose win in Norton III was reversed posthumously

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by cross_trainer, Oct 11, 2021.


  1. cross_trainer

    cross_trainer Liston was good, but no "Tire Iron" Jones Full Member

    18,216
    14,036
    Jun 30, 2005
    Two versions of prime Ali face each other.

    There is a very small, posthumous difference between these two Alis.

    One of them is the version of Ali from our own timeline. He will go on to win Ali/Norton III.

    The other Ali is from another, hypothetical timeline. This Ali will *also* go on to win his own Ali/Norton III, which plays out identically to the one in our timeline.

    The difference between these Alis is due to a branch-off between the timelines occurring only after both of the Alis have already died (on the same day, and in identical ways.)

    In our Ali's timeline, his win over Norton remained intact after his death.

    In the other Ali's timeline, officials from the relevant sanctioning organizations revisit Ali's victory in Norton III (in 2021, after Ali had died.) The officials reexamine the scoring, and declare that Norton was the actual victor of Ali/Norton III. The Boxrec entry in this timeline dutifully notes the change, and Ali from this timeline now has one extra loss on his official resume.

    The fights themselves in both timelines remain identical, though, along with the rest of both Alis' careers being identical. The only change is that in one timeline, Ali's victory over Norton in the third fight was officially reversed by sanctioning body bureaucrats after Ali's death.

    Taking each of these Alis in his prime, which one would you pick to win head to head?
     
    red corner, sasto and BCS8 like this.
  2. BCS8

    BCS8 VIP Member

    61,032
    81,501
    Aug 21, 2012
    They are the same fighter.

    But people would pick the one without the loss.
     
    cross_trainer likes this.
  3. cross_trainer

    cross_trainer Liston was good, but no "Tire Iron" Jones Full Member

    18,216
    14,036
    Jun 30, 2005
    Those are also my answers, for what it's worth. The other tricky part is that the alternative -- just doing your own revisionist scoring for every fight -- is sillier and more error prone than accepting official results.

    Considering how possible it is to be labeled a "nearly man" for losing close fights that could've gone either way, it's a tricky endeavor figuring out what an official verdict should mean.
     
  4. BCS8

    BCS8 VIP Member

    61,032
    81,501
    Aug 21, 2012
    I feel that in many cases doing your own scoring is legitimate (and part of what makes following the sport fun) because judges can and do get it wrong. The average fan, blind drunk and watching the fights in a loud sports bar, would likely never have scored against RJJ in Seoul or scored it 118-110 for Canelo like Adelaide "brown envelope" Byrd. IMHO Walcott also beat Louis. Etc.
     
    sasto and cross_trainer like this.
  5. cross_trainer

    cross_trainer Liston was good, but no "Tire Iron" Jones Full Member

    18,216
    14,036
    Jun 30, 2005
    Which is certainly the best argument for scoring it yourself. On the other hand, it makes it harder to have coherent conversations with other fans about the merits of Fighter XYZ if you're carrying an entire alternative Boxrec around in your head. And if your own scoring standards are idiosyncratic, it becomes hard to even figure that out unless you're inviting plenty of input.

    On the *other* other hand (and in your favor), there's this weirdness:

    This content is protected


    This content is protected


    This content is protected


    (Makes me wonder what the revised lineage is, since he would have succeeded Johnson, of all people.)
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2021
    BCS8 likes this.
  6. sasto

    sasto Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,534
    16,093
    Aug 5, 2020
    I'd favor Ali in this matchup, unless each takes a different part of the prime.

    Say one is Ali from the Cleveland Williams fight and the other is post-exile. In that case I'd have to go with Ali.

    This is a little like those Mormon posthumous baptisms.

    Regarding revisionist scoring, everyone does it but I've seen very few (and I'm not one of them) who can consistently update the ratings of not just their own winner and loser, but where they both stand with respect to their generation and what credit their future opponents deserve. If you say JMM should have gotten better results against Pac, that affects what you should think of Keith Thurman and Pac's other opponents.

    There are plenty who don't make those corrections, then others who way overcorrect ("he got a gift in 2 of his 60 fights, total trash").
     
    BCS8 and cross_trainer like this.
  7. BCS8

    BCS8 VIP Member

    61,032
    81,501
    Aug 21, 2012
    :ohno The WBC must be the biggest bunch of opportunists around.
     
    cross_trainer likes this.