Ken Norton is noted as the former WBC heavyweight champion. He didn't win his title in an actual title fight, but rather awarded to him by the WBC.

Leon Spinks, the then WBC and WBA heavyweight champion, came off a victory over Ali. He was supposed to fight Ken Norton but refused to and opted for a rematch with Ali. Spinks was stripped of the title and it was rewarded to Norton, after Norton beat Jimmy Young in a title eliminator match.

He ended up losing the title in his next fight against Larry Holmes, who won the title via split decision.

Do you think Norton should be recognized as a former world champion?

I'm not a fan of fighters getting titles anywhere other than in the ring.
However it would be a hard hearted person who didn't believe that Kenny Norton deserved to be introduced as an ex world champion. He fought in an awesomly tough era of heavyweights and made a big contribution.

Normally I'd say no. But given the calibre of fighter Norton was I'm inclined to give him a pass and say yes I have no problem with him being known as an ex-world champ.

I would say yes. Many of us thought he beat Ali but didn't get the decision. He fought Jimmy Young in a title elimination and won. Young also lost a controversial decision to Ali and was a top heavyweight. Spinks beat Ali and had to fight the winner of the the Norton-Young match but refused and fought a rematch with Ali. Norton might have held the title for awhile if not for a masterful boxer from easton Pa. But Norton should have gotten the shot against Spinks and he would have won.

Norton was a `Paper-Champion`just like Lennox Lewis.. Norton was given the belt coz Muhammad Ali fought Leon Spinks in a rematch then retired.. Lewis picked the belt out of the garbage can in 1993 he lost it then was given it back by the WBC in 96 yet he fought no-one who was a linear title holder... Lewis finally won the title in 99 on a very dubious decision over an old Holyfield, of the 48 sports reporters sat at ringside 43 had Holyfield as the winner, Lewis then refused to fight the No1 contenders Ruiz, Byrd & Vitali so was stripped of every belt... Ken Norton fought the No1 contender Larry Holmes in his 1st defence and lost on a split-decision in one of the greatest heavyweight title fights in boxing history which is a shame as Norton was a very good fighter.

No but I don't hold it against Norton, the guy was a very good fighter.

Norton was a `Paper-Champion`just like Lennox Lewis.. Norton was given the belt coz Muhammad Ali fought Leon Spinks in a rematch then retired.. Lewis picked the belt out of the garbage can in 1993 he lost it then was given it back by the WBC in 96 yet he fought no-one who was a linear title holder... Lewis finally won the title in 99 on a very dubious decision over an old Holyfield, of the 48 sports reporters sat at ringside 43 had Holyfield as the winner, Lewis then refused to fight the No1 contenders Ruiz, Byrd & Vitali so was stripped of every belt... Ken Norton fought the No1 contender Larry Holmes in his 1st defence and lost on a split-decision in one of the greatest heavyweight title fights in boxing history which is a shame as Norton was a very good fighter.

Why does everything with you always come back to a slam on Lennox Lewis? :thinking:

Poet

Norton was a `Paper-Champion`just like Lennox Lewis.. Norton was given the belt coz Muhammad Ali fought Leon Spinks in a rematch then retired.. Lewis picked the belt out of the garbage can in 1993 he lost it then was given it back by the WBC in 96 yet he fought no-one who was a linear title holder... Lewis finally won the title in 99 on a very dubious decision over an old Holyfield, of the 48 sports reporters sat at ringside 43 had Holyfield as the winner, Lewis then refused to fight the No1 contenders Ruiz, Byrd & Vitali so was stripped of every belt... Ken Norton fought the No1 contender Larry Holmes in his 1st defence and lost on a split-decision in one of the greatest heavyweight title fights in boxing history which is a shame as Norton was a very good fighter.

In 96, Lewis sued Don King for 4 million dollars because King and tyson refused to put the WBC title on the line against him, instead they decided to fight Bruce Seldon and then Holyfield. Lewis had been the number 1 contender since 1995 until February 7, 1997 when he defeated Oliver McCall to regain the title. He defeated the linear champion Shannon Briggs(by virtue of his win over George Foreman) on March 28, 1998. He was blatantly robbed in his first fight with Holyield before finally defeating him 8 months later

Why does everything with you always come back to a slam on Lennox Lewis? :thinking:

Poet

Because he's a cunt.

But hey, who wants to argue? Ain't worth it, right? Can't argue with a sick mind.

In 96, Lewis sued Don King for 4 million dollars because King and tyson refused to put the WBC title on the line against him, instead they decided to fight Bruce Seldon and then Holyfield. Lewis had been the number 1 contender since 1995 until February 7, 1997 when he defeated Oliver McCall to regain the title. He defeated the linear champion Shannon Briggs(by virtue of his win over George Foreman) on March 28, 1998. He was blatantly robbed in his first fight with Holyield before finally defeating him 8 months later
Been done to death Silva, Sonny has his opinion and is sticking to it. Do think though though shoe horning it into a thread on Norton isn't on. I don't like one of my neighbours but I don't moan about him in a thread about Mike Tyson even though his name is Mike!

Been done to death Silva, Sonny has his opinion and is sticking to it. Do think though though shoe horning it into a thread on Norton isn't on. I don't like one of my neighbours but I don't moan about him in a thread about Mike Tyson even though his name is Mike!
Guess the point here is that Spinks wouldn't fight Norton who I think few would argue would beat him. So if a title holder doesn't defend against his mandatory then he deserves to have his title off him unless we are to go back to the days when guys like Burley etc don't get a shot. Otherside is though that Don King can virtually choose the mandatorys for the WBC so it's complicated. On the same subject my neighbour has dumped a washing machine outside his house and.........

Because he's a cunt.

But hey, who wants to argue? Ain't worth it, right? Can't argue with a sick mind.

Too bloody right :boxing:

Poet

Norton was a `Paper-Champion`just like Lennox Lewis.. Norton was given the belt coz Muhammad Ali fought Leon Spinks in a rematch then retired.. Lewis picked the belt out of the garbage can in 1993 he lost it then was given it back by the WBC in 96 yet he fought no-one who was a linear title holder... Lewis finally won the title in 99 on a very dubious decision over an old Holyfield, of the 48 sports reporters sat at ringside 43 had Holyfield as the winner, Lewis then refused to fight the No1 contenders Ruiz, Byrd & Vitali so was stripped of every belt... Ken Norton fought the No1 contender Larry Holmes in his 1st defence and lost on a split-decision in one of the greatest heavyweight title fights in boxing history which is a shame as Norton was a very good fighter.

This has nothing to do with my thoughts on Lennox Lewis.. i addressed the topic on Ken Norton who was a `Paper Champion`i also added that Lewis was also a `Paper Champion`They are the only two men in Heavyweight history to be `Paper Champions`so i was justified in the writing of my thread... because no-one else had the insight to mention it, does not mean i am a cunt.. but as always on here every fighter who ever laced a pair of gloves on has their pitfalls with the exception of LL who has legitimate excuses for his defeats, referee counted to quickly, he never trained correctly, he was not focused etc etc bullsh*t`... the fact is that LL masscaraded as a Heavyweight champion even tho he had never beaten the man who beat the man, just as Ken Norton did

Why does everything with you always come back to a slam on Lennox Lewis? :thinking:

Poet

are you claiming LL was NOT a paper champion? or are you just angry at me for mentioning it.. either way it is relevent in this topic for it to be brought up

Lewis picked the belt out of the garbage can in 1993
Bowe threw it there as he refused to fight Lewis. What would you do say "fair enough keep it Riddick"?

he lost it then was given it back by the WBC in 96

Thought he won the vacant WBC championship versus McCall? Makes him as much a "paper" champion as Patterson was.

Lewis finally won the title in 99 on a very dubious decision over an old Holyfield, of the 48 sports reporters sat at ringside 43 had Holyfield as the winner

Notice you always ignore the "draw". He beat Holyfield 2nd time but I will agree it wasn't as convincing as the draw. What that doesn't mean though is that you can say he didn't fight as well as he did in a draw therefore he must have lost.

Lewis then refused to fight the No1 contenders Ruiz, Byrd

This has been covered so many times

& Vitali so was stripped of every belt...

Think you'll find he beat Vitali and retired with the WBC belt?

Ken Norton fought the No1 contender Larry Holmes in his 1st defence and lost on a split-decision in one of the greatest heavyweight title fights in boxing history which is a shame as Norton was a very good fighter.
Finally you say a little about Ken Norton and as usual when you get off Lewis I agree with you.
One difference between the two was Norton never won a title bout whereas Lewis won 15.

the fact is that LL masscaraded as a Heavyweight champion even tho he had never beaten the man who beat the man, just as Ken Norton did
Well he lost the WBC title to McCall and won it back by beating McCall albeit by complicated few steps removed route. He beat Holyfield and Tyson so if you want to call say Tyson "the man", then he beat hm. Admitidly it was a shadow of the real Tyson but you can level that against Holmes re Ali?

This has nothing to do with my thoughts on Lennox Lewis.. i addressed the topic on Ken Norton who was a `Paper Champion`i also added that Lewis was also a `Paper Champion`They are the only two men in Heavyweight history to be `Paper Champions`so i was justified in the writing of my thread... because no-one else had the insight to mention it, does not mean i am a cunt.. but as always on here every fighter who ever laced a pair of gloves on has their pitfalls with the exception of LL who has legitimate excuses for his defeats, referee counted to quickly, he never trained correctly, he was not focused etc etc bullsh*t`... the fact is that LL masscaraded as a Heavyweight champion even tho he had never beaten the man who beat the man, just as Ken Norton did

Ah! The smell of irony!

Poet

Bowe threw it there as he refused to fight Lewis. What would you do say "fair enough keep it Riddick"?

Thought he won the vacant WBC championship versus McCall? Makes him as much a "paper" champion as Patterson was.

Notice you always ignore the "draw". He beat Holyfield 2nd time but I will agree it wasn't as convincing as the draw. What that doesn't mean though is that you can say he didn't fight as well as he did in a draw therefore he must have lost.

This has been covered so many times

Think you'll find he beat Vitali and retired with the WBC belt?

Finally you say a little about Ken Norton and as usual when you get off Lewis I agree with you.
One difference between the two was Norton never won a title bout whereas Lewis won 15.

Bowe threw the WBC belt in the garbage can because he was going to be stripped of it if he never defended it against Lewis.. the reason he never defended it against Lewis was that Lewis was demanding a 50/50 purse split and options on Bowes next 3 fights should Lewis lose.. yet Bowe was undisputed champion, Lewis knew his demands would never be met by Bowe and was happy to pick the belt out of the bin and defend it against Frank Bruno, Phil Jackson & Tony"junkie"Tucker.

Lewis won the WBC vacant title from McCall who was only days out of a drug-rehab and in no condition mentaly or physically to be fighting for the title.

Lewis fought a draw with Holyfield and IMO was well beaten in his 2nd fight with Holyfield and also the opinion of most at ringside.

Lewis beat Vitali but only on a technicality and it was clear to all watching the Vitali was the better man on that night, Lewis told the world he would face Vitali in an immediate rematch yet he dragged out his title reign for 18 months and only days before he was due to be stripped of the belt announced his retirement.

Lets not forget that Lewis is the only Heavyweight champion in history to be `Stripped` of every version of the title for refusing to fight the No1 contenders.. WBA belt for refusing to fight John Ruiz, IBF belt for refusing to fight Chris Byrd & was to be stripped of WBC for refusing to rematch Vitali.... like it or not those are the facts.

GJC your not as clever as i thought if you think Lewis won 15 title fights as champion... The champion is always the man who beat the man... Tyson beat Spinks, Douglas beat Tyson, Holyfield beat Douglas, Bowe beat Holyfield, Holyfield beat Bowe, Moorer beat Holyfield, Foreman beat Moorer, Briggs beat Foreman (Robbery). Lewis beat Briggs.

Through out Lewis paper champion years we had a Undisputed Heavyweight Champion.. Lewis was only fighting Class C fighters and his PPV numbers was dismal, no-one except the Canadians & British thought he had any chance against the top fighters from the USA and Lewis always refused to fight those top fighters, he continued that trend unto he finally retired with the exception of fighting an old Holyfield to a draw which i thought he won and a points victory over Holyfield which i thought he lost.

The Canadians & British do not want to hear anything that is negative about Lewis and should anyone like me put it into words then i am always `jumped on`and called a hater or a cunt.. yet those who call me can write what ever they want about Mike Tyson or Riddick Bowe without fear of ever being called for doing it... the bottom line is, Lennox Lewis is/was a Canadian/British thing.. and if those fans want to claim him to be on a par with Muhammad Ali like many of them claim on these forums then they are entitled to their opinions, while the vast majority of knowledgable boxing fans laugh at their claim.

P.S. Floyd Patterson fought and won the undisputed Heavyweight Title that was vacant due to the retirement of Rocky Marciano.. Floyd was rated No1 and fought No2 contender Archie Moore... There was no other fighter out there in the background who was the legitimate undisputed champion, whereas in the case of Lennox Lewis there was

Well he lost the WBC title to McCall and won it back by beating McCall albeit by complicated few steps removed route. He beat Holyfield and Tyson so if you want to call say Tyson "the man", then he beat hm. Admitidly it was a shadow of the real Tyson but you can level that against Holmes re Ali?

GJC.. surely you are having a laugh, How was Tyson the `man`in 2002?... it was 6yrs since he had been champion.

McCall had lost his title to Bruno with Bruno losing it to Tyson who then lost it to Holyfield.. but we are talking here about a single belt (WBC) George Foreman was the champion being `The Man who beat The Man`

you say,`when i get off Lewis you agree with me`well its obvious that my opinions of Lewis and your opinions of Lewis are totally different, so we will both stick to our opinions and move on.. you being respected and me being a cunt!

yet i am far from being the only one with the opinions i have of Lewis... like ive said earlier Lewis is a Canadian/British thing.

Patterson became a real champion by beating Ingmar Johansson, so he should not be counted as a "paper" champion.

Patterson became a real champion by beating Ingmar Johansson, so he should not be counted as a "paper" champion.

no he never... he fought Archie Moore for the vacant title in 1956 after Rocky Marciano retired in 1955, Floyd defended his title 4 times before losing it in his 5th defence against Johansson then being the 1st to ever regain the title by beating Ingo in their rematch 12 months later.

Bowe threw the WBC belt in the garbage can because he was going to be stripped of it if he never defended it against Lewis.. the reason he never defended it against Lewis was that Lewis was demanding a 50/50 purse split and options on Bowes next 3 fights should Lewis lose.. yet Bowe was undisputed champion, Lewis knew his demands would never be met by Bowe and was happy to pick the belt out of the bin and defend it against Frank Bruno, Phil Jackson & Tony"junkie"Tucker.

You would have to source this for me please as that is not my memory of it.
I am dubious that a challenger could or would make such demands and whether a title holder would have to entertain them. Also my memory is that Bowe threw the belt pretty quickly after Lewis beat Ruddock not after months of negotiations?

Lewis won the WBC vacant title from McCall who was only days out of a drug-rehab and in no condition mentaly or physically to be fighting for the title.

Yes but he won the vacant WBC title and was not given it? As to McCall's condition thats not really Lewis's fault?

Lewis fought a draw with Holyfield and IMO was well beaten in his 2nd fight with Holyfield and also the opinion of most at ringside.

Again you'll have to sourch the 43 out of 48 but we'll agree to differ I thought Lewis won but it was a tighter fight than the first, I think well beaten is strong whatever your view.

Lewis beat Vitali but only on a technicality

Again though you muddy the waters, in post I quoted you said he didn't defend against Vitali? He did and he won.

Lets not forget that Lewis is the only Heavyweight champion in history to be `Stripped` of every version of the title for refusing to fight the No1 contenders.. WBA belt for refusing to fight John Ruiz, IBF belt for refusing to fight Chris Byrd & was to be stripped of WBC for refusing to rematch Vitali.... like it or not those are the facts.

Don't agree that are facts, he retired with the WBC belt as you yourself state above. Ruiz he took walk away money from King is a pretty well established fact.

GJC your not as clever as i thought if you think Lewis won 15 title fights as champion... The champion is always the man who beat the man... Tyson beat Spinks, Douglas beat Tyson, Holyfield beat Douglas, Bowe beat Holyfield, Holyfield beat Bowe, Moorer beat Holyfield, Foreman beat Moorer, Briggs beat Foreman (Robbery). Lewis beat Briggs.

Sonny bless you if you thought I was clever but Lewis title wins are not a matter of opinion here it is a matter of counting. You can't downgrade a fight as not being a title fight just because you don't rate the opponent
Tyson,Vitali,Tucker,Bruno,Tua,Golota,Holyfield,Gra nt,Botha,Rahman,Briggs,Jackson,Akinwande,Mabvrovic and McCall were all sanctioned title fights Lewis won, 15?

The Canadians & British do not want to hear anything that is negative about Lewis and should anyone like me put it into words then i am always `jumped on`and called a hater or a cunt.. yet those who call me can write what ever they want about Mike Tyson or Riddick Bowe without fear of ever being called for doing it... the bottom line is, Lennox Lewis is/was a Canadian/British thing.. and if those fans want to claim him to be on a par with Muhammad Ali like many of them claim on these forums then they are entitled to their opinions, while the vast majority of knowledgable boxing fans laugh at their claim.

I've said before though i'll doubt you'll believe me that I'm not a big Lewis fan. I think he made himself an Englishman of convenience and there wasn't much in his personality or his always fighting within himself style that I warmed to. That said I have respect for him as a fighter though I would hardly put him on a par with Ali I would put him in my top 12 heavys all time..
Problem with yourself sonny and I mean this with sincerity is you are a bit of a broken record with Lewis and I think the reason you caught so much hostility in this thread is the fact that in my view you could have contented yourself with "Ken Norton was a paper champ like Lewis but in my opinion a better fighter" and then discuss Norton in the essentially Norton thread?
As I have said before and again in sincerity you are a good poster whose non Lewis posts (which I don't agree with) I will continue to enjoy.
You have a blind spot on Lewis, its not a biggie we all have them. I have Bruno, Poet had Berbick etc etc.

Ken Norton is noted as the former WBC heavyweight champion. He didn't win his title in an actual title fight, but rather awarded to him by the WBC.

Leon Spinks, the then WBC and WBA heavyweight champion, came off a victory over Ali. He was supposed to fight Ken Norton but refused to and opted for a rematch with Ali. Spinks was stripped of the title and it was rewarded to Norton, after Norton beat Jimmy Young in a title eliminator match.

He ended up losing the title in his next fight against Larry Holmes, who won the title via split decision.

Do you think Norton should be recognized as a former world champion?

Yes i rate ken as a real champion, one of the best heavyweights in the greatest ever era of heavies, i had him him beating holmes by 2 rounds

GJC.. surely you are having a laugh, How was Tyson the `man`in 2002?... it was 6yrs since he had been champion.

McCall had lost his title to Bruno with Bruno losing it to Tyson who then lost it to Holyfield.. but we are talking here about a single belt (WBC) George Foreman was the champion being `The Man who beat The Man`

I'm obviously getting my man men confused :) I blame the alphabet bodies!
OK Foreman( WBA and IBF not WBC?) Foreman was picking his defences very carefully which together with the sanctioning bodies trying to get him off the pot it wasn't easy for Lewis to get to him. I wont say it for a fact because I don't know it for a fact but I doubt that Foreman would have rushed to give Lewis a shot. Lewis did beat Briggs who "beat" Foreman though, if that is close?

you say,`when i get off Lewis you agree with me`well its obvious that my opinions of Lewis and your opinions of Lewis are totally different, so we will both stick to our opinions and move on.. you being respected and me being a cunt!

Sure we'll agree to differ thats fine, I only have a problem with your posts sonnyboy when you cite opinions as facts, no problem with you holding a different opinion who is to say who is right re opinions?
And I don't think you are a cunt just think you go off on one a bit.

You would have to source this for me please as that is not my memory of it.
I am dubious that a challenger could or would make such demands and whether a title holder would have to entertain them. Also my memory is that Bowe threw the belt pretty quickly after Lewis beat Ruddock not after months of negotiations?

Yes but he won the vacant WBC title and was not given it? As to McCall's condition thats not really Lewis's fault?

Again you'll have to sourch the 43 out of 48 but we'll agree to differ I thought Lewis won but it was a tighter fight than the first, I think well beaten is strong whatever your view.

Again though you muddy the waters, in post I quoted you said he didn't defend against Vitali? He did and he won.

Don't agree that are facts, he retired with the WBC belt as you yourself state above. Ruiz he took walk away money from King is a pretty well established fact.

Sonny bless you if you thought I was clever but Lewis title wins are not a matter of opinion here it is a matter of counting. You can't downgrade a fight as not being a title fight just because you don't rate the opponent
Tyson,Vitali,Tucker,Bruno,Tua,Golota,Holyfield,Gra nt,Botha,Rahman,Briggs,Jackson,Akinwande,Mabvrovic and McCall were all sanctioned title fights Lewis won, 15?

I've said before though i'll doubt you'll believe me that I'm not a big Lewis fan. I think he made himself an Englishman of convenience and there wasn't much in his personality or his always fighting within himself style that I warmed to. That said I have respect for him as a fighter though I would hardly put him on a par with Ali I would put him in my top 12 heavys all time..
Problem with yourself sonny and I mean this with sincerity is you are a bit of a broken record with Lewis and I think the reason you caught so much hostility in this thread is the fact that in my view you could have contented yourself with "Ken Norton was a paper champ like Lewis but in my opinion a better fighter" and then discuss Norton in the essentially Norton thread?
As I have said before and again in sincerity you are a good poster whose non Lewis posts (which I don't agree with) I will continue to enjoy.
You have a blind spot on Lewis, its not a biggie we all have them. I have Bruno, Poet had Berbick etc etc.

GJC.. you can find the video on youtube of Riddick Bowe telling how Lewis priced himself out of their fight and had no intention of ever fighting Bowe... infact that video has been shown on this forum in the past on the Bowe v Lewis topic..

Almost every single member on this forum and every other forum has some kind of dislike for a curtain boxer yet they never ever get the ridicule which i get for calling into question many of Lennox Lewis career moves .. The reason being is like i have already said, Lewis is a Canadian/British thing.. but that does not mean that i have to fall into line and go along with things which i know to be `not correct`.. i am not a hater of Lewis although many may say i am, in fact i have seen him fight live` on 5 occasions, what the problem is with my Lewis posts is that i tell it like it was and some do not want to hear me tell it like it was because they have this mythical image in their heads that Lewis was something far greater than he really was, and those people have never in their lives been to a live` boxing show never mind ever seen Lewis fight live`... i was there the night McCall poleaxed him, i seen it with my own eyes, yet there are many many on these forums who was not there on the night but will try to tell me that i never seen what i seen, they try to tell me that i am wrong and that it never happened like i say it did, these are the same people who on this forum call me a cunt for saying what i seen and what i feel about a fighter, they say that i am a hater and that i am wrong which i find bazzar... These are the same British fans who claim Ricky Hatton with his IBO or IBU belt was the real champion and claim Floyd Mayweather is a fraud, they are patriotic and will claim there fighter to be the greatest who ever lived until the day he gets `levelled` then they will deny ever being a fan of him... my opinion of Lewis will not change.

Above you claim John Ruiz took step-a-side money from Don King, yet when Lewis took step-a-side money from King every Lewis fan claimed "Tyson was scared and avoided Lewis"... but if i wrote that "Lewis was scared and avoided Ruiz" i get called a cunt and i am a hater.

i said he never defended in a "REMATCH" with Vitali after he promised the Boxing world that he would, he announced his retirement only days before he was to be stripped..

Riddick Bowe is claimed to have avoided Lewis by throwing his belt in the bin, yet Lewis gave up his belt rather than face Chris Byrd... what if Bowe had never dumped that belt in the bin, he waited for the WBC to strip him of it, would it still be claimed that he was affraid of Lewis?

many of those so-called title defences you have listed was made by Lewis when he was a `Paper Champion` and not The man who beat the man, we had an undisputed heavyweight champion of the world when Lewis was making some of those feeble defences.

Yes i rate ken as a real champion, one of the best heavyweights in the greatest ever era of heavies, i had him him beating holmes by 2 rounds

i also had Norton winning against Holmes yet we are in the minority so we will be labelled as "Fools or cunts" and to never ever again be believed or taken seriously anything which we say on here