HOLMES V NORTON - Great Fight.... BUT

Sounds fair, but he still ain't in Larry's league.

 

Great fight, one of the greatest ever, Holmes won more rounds and the decision should not have been nearly as close as it was in the end.

 

Pretty hard on Ali considering he had met Norton 3 times and was in his mid 30's by this stage not in his prime like Larry.I think maybe he gets a pass for this one.

Foreman was an interesting one as I've got no doubt Ali had absolutely no fears about stepping in the ring with him again after the beating he gave him in Zaire,plus how he looked against Lyle.Maybe it may have happened if Young didn't get in the way.

As for Jimmy Young I'm glad Ali-Young 2 didn't happen as their first fight was dreadful and who'd really want to sit through 15 rounds of that again?

 

Who is? :yep

 

He met Norton three times but Norton was regarded as nothing more than tune-up first time out, rematch he wanted becuase he lost and title defence made becuase it was 1-1 and he couldn't just fight the Coopman's and Dunn's for the rest of his reign- and Norton was regarded as the #1 contender in many eyes.

Foreman was the mandatory for almost all of Ali's second reign, that reason more than any gives him the right of a rematch. Ali made one mandatory defence from 74-78, that should never be allowed.

Probably about four more people than wanted to sit through Ali-Evangelista.

 

Even after Manilla Ali faced Young, Norton and Shavers. Yes, at least one of Foreman and Young should have had a rematch, but at that point in his career I have a hard time faulting him. He should have been retired by then, though, of course.

 

Foreman can't have been mandatory for "almost all of Ali's reign", since he took a year off after Zaire and retired in 1977. There were only 14 months between his victory over Lyle and loss to Young. During that time Ali took on Young and Norton.

And Foreman must have been the only mandatory Ali didn't face.

 

Yeah but he was still regarded as the best 'other' heavyweight in the world from 74-77 and Ali made 7 defences without a mandatory, which is a lot of fudging, let's be honest.

 

Ali made four defences between Foreman's combeback against Lyle and loss to Young, and two of them were against Norton and Young. Just before that he had faced Frazier. I don't think those are shameful stats at all.

 

Yes, but Foreman was mandatory after 1975 (only dropped lower to inactivity during that 75 itself). In that period Ali fought four times without a mandatory then signed to fight again before Forman's loss, so that was 5 defences when he'd verbally agreed to the contest throughout 1976. He began fudging the issue by announcing his retirement...then announcing he wasn't retired...then retiring again...

 

Shameful stats has nothing to do with it, rules are rules- at least they're meant to be.

 

1975 - Foreman is inactive. 1976 - Foreman establish himself as nr. 1 contender during the year, but Ali faces one mandatory this year in Norton. 1977 - Foreman loses to Young in March and promptly retires.

It's hardly Dempsey/Wills material, is it? And Foreman could hardly have been the mandatory before his win over Frazier in july 1976. That was 9 months before he retired. Ali fought Norton (the nr. 1 contender at that point) in september, which means that he went six months and one (scheduled) defence without taking on the new nr. 1. I don't really see the scandal here.

 

Good post, but with one fatal flaw...Norton wasn't Ali's mandatory. :good

 

He was. From after Zaire to mid-1975. Then after the Frazier fight until he lost to young.

True- and Norton (as of 77). Frazier was the only mandatory Ali did face.

 

I would like to know your source concerning this. In either case, Norton was rankend nr. 1 by The Ring.