Have you ever thought that we sometimes identify "vulnerabilities" that weren't really there? Was Norton's style really a nightmare for Ali and for slicksters in general? All of his fights against that sort of opponent (Holmes, Ali, Young) were very, very close. Maybe he was just a very good fighter. Was Ali really as vulnerable to the left hook as they say he was...or did Frazier, an insanely conditioned ATG pressure fighter, just happen to throw a lot of them? Did Fitzsimmons really have trouble against crouching fighters, or was Jeffries just a massive, powerful heavyweight with good reflexes who beat an ageing Fitz and happened to use a crouch? ...and so on. In short, how much comes down to specific "styles" vs. a fighter's general quality?
I've thought about it. A lot of the times it's obvious these are some great fighters. However, Norton was clearly a stylistic problem for Ali. Frazier on the other hand was a clash of styles between ATG fighters. Norton was a solid fighter, but he would never have a chance against some of the guys Ali beat and knocked out. Norton can't beat Liston, Foreman, and probably loses to Frazier. He doesn't do good going backwards. For Ali he was coached well (To jab in between his jab) and had the style to disrupt Ali's rythm. Great fighter no doubt, but certain styles work well/better against others. I think a prime Ali beats Foreman as well but Frazier never beats Foreman in my eyes, whether that be prime or not. The second question is a good question. I think it's a combination. When Ali went to throw the right hand Frazier can dip and left hook him. But really, if Tyson fought Ali and dropped a lot of right hooks on him do we see he's vulnerable to the right? I don't know, I think you have some point.
good thread cant think of any off my head, perhaps when people were saying Cotto had the tools and was a stylistic nightmare for FMJ i honestly never saw that.
Frazier-Foreman was a bad match-up stylistically for Frazier as well. Frazier was a good brawling heavyweight but he was always gonna struggle against a big guy with a sledgehammer for a punch but I wouldnt say that makes him much worse of a heavyweight than Foreman it just goes to show that styles must make fights. Norton as well, while I feel he is underrated due to the great era he fought in he was a match-up nightmare for Ali and Norton probably got the better of him overall which is some achievement in itself. Overall I would say styles have a big bearing on how fights go.
(1) Which top-level fighters did Norton beat who weren't slicksters? (2) Is it not the case that Norton was never easily beaten by a slick boxer, whereas sluggers (especially at the top level) tended to handle him easily? If he was a very good fighter, then one would have to wonder why he was only good against certain types of boxer. Were Jose Luis Garcia, Gerry Cooney and Earnie Shavers really THAT great? That said, I wouldn't say that Norton's edge was against slicksters per se. I think that anyone who can't force a prime Norton onto the backfoot is going to have major problems with him, since he was so hard to out-jab and could go forward while exorbing a minimum of punishment. Actually, it was when slicksters were at their slickest (in the sense of moving laterally) that they had their best moments against Norton. Get Ken Norton to turn sideways and you have a chance. Get him to move backwards and you have a very good chance. If you move straight back or stand still with him, you'll have major problems. What about Ali's fights with Henry Cooper and Sonny Banks? I don't think it's coincidental that, on the three occasions that Ali was knocked down by head-punches, all three were left hooks.
