Was Ken Norton tougher to figure out for Ali than Frazier?

The problem was that Norton could go the distance. Frazier was always only good on the inside, where Ali had him where he wanted to have him. This made Frazier an easy target to hit for Ali, but Norton was hard to catch. Norton was also faster than Joe Frazier and had the greater defense and the better footwork. That's why he was the tougher opponent for Ali. But Frazier had more will to destroy Ali, Norton in fact loved Ali because he gave him the chance on the title. That's why the Thrilla in Manila was that hard for Ali(Frazier wanted to literally murder Ali). The reason Foreman could destroy Norton so easily is that Norton didn't go the distance and was scared to death by him. Boxing is much about psychology, Tyson said that when his opponents looked away as he looked in their eyes, he already beat them. When a fighter is scared, he has no chance to win, because his will to win is gone.

Yes. Styles make fights. Norton was bent at the torso and threw a jab from his waist. He did not have a chin. Every power puncher he ever faced knocked him out early. Ali and Larry Holmes were in no way shape or form punchers and never were. Norton was awkward and tough to figure for both of them. His fight with Holmes is one of the fights of the decade of the 1970s. Ali also could not get into Nortons head. This is a tactic he used successful with many others i.e Foreman and Frazier. The other side of the coin Norton may have been somewhat intimidated by power punchers with Ali and Holmes this was not the case. Everyone has an opponent who for them is kryptonite. . There are cases of better fighters losing to a lesser opponent. Barkley-Hearns comes to mind. In fact if Ali and Norton fought again in 1977-78 I am sure that Norton would be the winner. Yes this do not mean Norton is superior but he was the most difficult for Muhammad Ali.

Yes.

But he should not have been.

First, Ali had major ring rust having been out of the game for so long. It took him time to get back into the game. Norton had that as a major advantage.

Secondly, Ali was a head-hunter, and Norton moved his head. Body shots would have stopped Norton, but Ali refused to change his style to accommodate. He had the same problem with Frazier, but was at least back in shape by then.

Watch Foreman fight Norton and Frazier.....he uses hooks to the body to slow them down. They can move their heads back and forth, but the belt is still there. Foreman hit for that belt.

Ali could have had an easier time with both if he had done that as well, and would have sailed through Norton if he had not had the layoff.

Styles are different and can affect anyone. Some feel that Norton actually beat Ali twice, but the judges looked the other way. The Sept 1976 bout in Yankee Stadium should have gone to Norton many feel. Frazier was the same in all three bouts with Ali.

Yes, Norton had that busy, awkward fighting style which recalled young Ali, then known as Clay's difficulties against the underrated Doug Jones. Norton's camp could have studied that fight which helped Norton trouble Ali in all their three fights. It also helped Norton that Ali did not particularly have a one-punch KO capability that had been Norton's bane and Ali could not land as many punch as he did against other foes including Frazier. Norton's awkwardness made it very difficult for Ali to time him and hit him squarely as as often as he wanted to.

Styles make fights, and obviously Ali had problems with Norton, much more than Frazier.

It is not figuring out as much as it is trying to combat their styles, I am sure Ali knew what he wanted to do, but it is not always easy to do what you want to do when the other guy is hitting you.

Yes. That crab-like stance befuddled Ali no end. Ali could handle Frazier as long as he's in shape.

Norton had a strategic-awkward style - Ali never truly figured it out, but big power ripped through it -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGhXIDRYzO8