Norton, not just a paper champ.

I have my score paper somewhere, I had Ali winning by one round. I might re view it if i cant find it. I remember thinking ken just eased off when ali was faking too many times.

 

Nice post :good Ken Norton's an example of how,sometimes,the line between great and very good can be a very fine one. Consensually,Joe Frazier's looked upon as a great fighter,and Ken a very good one. This I go along with. I think that only two things split them. How we see a fight between them,had it occurred. Joe's style would have been all wrong for Ken.

Also,it's hard to imagine Frazier being knocked out by Jose Luis Garcia. Having said that,Norton avenged that loss in emphatic fashion. Ken is among the very best of the 'very good ones' in my opinion.

 

As I'm always saying,I definitely give the second fight to Muhammad. By two rounds.
The third one should have gone to Norton,by about three rounds. Having said that though,a lot of the rounds were close,and it was hardly a robbery as some will have it.

 

I remember prior to Ali-Norton II that a lot of the sportswriters were picking Ali to win in a one-sided blowout and stop Norton. Ali had used his new training camp in Deer Lake, PA for the first time, and he was out to avenge his broken jaw loss. Virtually no one gave Norton much of a chance. Even though Norton lost the decision, it was close and is still debated today. That Norton did so much better than expected was the tipoff that he was the real thing. In the third Ali fight, I believe that Norton did not get fair credit for his body attack, which could have won him more of the closer rounds. As with all three Ali fights, the fighter who won the last round won the fight. In round 15 of the last fight, Norton was the aggressor throughout, but threw virtually no punches during the first two minutes, while Ali was winning the round with jabs. Perhaps he was being cautious or pacing himself, but he repeated this pattern during the Holmes fight, which doubtless cost him some rounds there as well. A few more punches thrown in Ali III and Holmes may well have given Norton the official nod in those fights, and the championship wins along with it. Even so, there can be little doubt that at least between 1976 and 1978 he was the best heavyweight in the world and should be remembered as such.

 

Prety dire list.

If you are going to include alphabet champions, then I don't think that any lineal champion would make the cut.

 

There is pleanty to criticise Norton on and I often do, but actualy a win over Ali has to be weighed prety heavily when you are comparing him to the weaker champions.

 

I'm afraid, there were dozens of primitive rough heavyweight sluggers/punchers (who were never even ranked) between 1976 and 1978 who would have stopped Norton quickly. That's too big of a flaw to call Norton borderline great, despite his success against light-hitting boxers.

 

:shock: :bart :nono :twisted:

 

You should. And he did quite a bit more than Vitali, Bowe, Norton and Jeanette. And other than them he did most of it when he was past his best and against guys bigger than him.