Norton VS Ali II

I think the lust for saying Norton got robbed in the third blinds them somewhat to what's actually being discussed.

 

It was a 12 round fight.

 

I didn't notice.

 

I was looking for this thread because another poster suggested Ali lost all three matches. All three were actually very competitive. Kenny was a tough out for all but the hardest punchers with heavy jabs who could penetrate the cross guard.

 

I haven't watched it in 30+ years but I remember Ali won close but clean.

 

I remember scoring it for Norton, but there were swing rounds that could have easily gone the other way.

The Split Decision was fair and still an accolade to Norton, as it was a superbly prepared Ali. Had Kenny listened to Futch from the very beginning, he could have gotten the nod.

Fantastic scrap. I line to think Frazier and Norton played pivotal role in forging Ali's will and hunger before Zaire.

 

Ken Norton vs Muhammad Ali 2

1 Ali
2 Ali
3 Ali
4 Ali
5 Norton
6 Ali
7 Norton
8 Norton
9 Ali
10 Norton
11 Norton
12 Ali

115-113 Ali

Ali looked alot better in this fight faster, fitter, and being able to use his famous footwork for all 12 rounds. Aswell as hurting and rocking Norton a few times something he didn't do at all in the first meeting.

Ali just won too many of the early rounds with his footwork and jab, and he closed the show with a good 12th round. I don't see any controversy here it was a good competitive fight but a fight Ali closely but clearly won.

I could see an argument for Norton maybe earning a draw, but anymore than that would be reaching in my opinion.

I had Norton winning fight 1 by 7-4-1 and fight 3 by 8-7.

 

It has been a long time since I watched and scored their second fight, and I probably scored it for Ali. But what stands out in my memory about that fight is some of the predictions made by sports writers and commentators. Many predicted that Ali would dominate the fight and avenge the earlier loss with a vengeance, punishing Norton mercilessly and stopping him around the 9th round. That Norton was competitive throughout the fight and made it close was a type of moral victory even though he did not get the decision.

 

Excellent points.

After the first fight, with the degree of apparent mental and physical slack available to Ali to pull up, I can understand how Ali would’ve been well favoured, in all potential, for the rematch.

That Ali, having trained so hard coming in at 212 lbs and looking as close to his 60s trim as was at all possible, would’ve served to strengthen the confidence of the pundits that Ali would not only reclaim the margin Norton beat him by but also establish his own clear margin over Norton in fight 2.

That Norton still did so well in the rematch might’ve been reflective of the substantive issues that Norton would always give Ali - issues that might’ve been put down in the first instance ONLY to Ali’s own lack of preparedness rather than duly factoring Norton’s own, absolute, stand alone qualities also.

Also, after the upset, very likely that Norton himself had notably improved in general as fighter in terms of both skill and confidence, and particularly so in the face of Muhammad Ali who he was, of course, already familiar with after fight 1.

Now it’s time to talk the Rubber Match…

 

I scored the III fight for Norton, I thought it was a clear win. The II fight, I scored I defintely scored for Ali

 

The idea that being floating around by one or two here that it isn't close is laughable. There's not much in it. 8 of the 12 rounds were swept unanimously with all 3 judges- and that was 4 a-piece, IIRC (Ali with 1,2,3,12) and Norton with (7,8,10,11) with opinions split on the other 4, obviously with a slight edge to Ali as he got the nod.

Ring had it a draw, as did Boxing News (Graham Houston). Don Majeski of Boxing Illustrated thought Norton won (although Lew Eskin of the same mag had Ali winning). Very close fight.