Marvin Hagler vs Jake Lamotta

Lamotta was a tough man with a lot of heart, but Hagler was also just as tough, and i believe he had just as much heart. The difference lies in skills, Hagler is the much more skilled of the two. Hagler wins, but i see Lamotta putting up a hell of fight

LaMotta won alot of fights on his toughness, but guess what?... Marivin Hagler was ever bit as tough. It comes down to skill and at the end of the day there is not one thing LaMotta does better than Hagler. Hagler UD

skills and styles would make the difference here Hagler was faster, "sweeter", and a southpaw who could change stance. La Motta was a great fighter and he beat a prime (but smaller) SRR, and he was not just another mayorga looking for a ko, he was a lot more methodical than that but... I think hagler would be too much for him, bcso he was a more versatile fighter and he would take the decision this would have been a great fight, which would go the distance unless someone could cut the other enough to get the stoppage. Again there would be a higher chance for hagler to do that. I say Hagler UD ot late tko by cuts.

You guys are seriously underrating Jake LaMotta if you pick John Mugabi to beat him, hell, some of you think he would stop LaMotta. There's no way in hell that happens. Jake is up there with Hagler in terms of chin. Jake would take anything Mugabi has to give and barely flinch. LaMotta overwhelms Mugabi with his pressure and numerous punches from all angle and takes a clear decision.

It's always hard to compare fighters from the two halfes of the 20th century. Brawlers such as Jake LaMotta don't exist anymore in todays professional circuit. His heart and determination have been formidable but boxingwise he would be taken to school by most of todays middleweights. This might be highly controversial for most of you but I believe that f.e. someone like Felix Sturm would beat Jake in a boring 12 round UD in todays circumstances. Marvin Hagler is the prime example of a modern middleweight. He could do it all and more. He had the punch, the boxing skills, the ring intelligence, the expierence and the determination. In his prime his strengths came together and made him close to unbeatable. If Hagler fought LaMotta in the early 80s Jake wouldn't stand a chance. I'll go as far as saying that Jon Mugabi would've easily crushed LaMotta if they fought in the 80s. If they would've fought several times in the 40s the story might be a different one though. During 5 fights in 2 months for example all of LaMottas strengths would come to play. Hagler has never been tested in this kind of circumstances. So I can't say how he'd possibly have reacted if his eyes were still swollen from the last encounter and Jake just would put the pressure on and on.

Sorry for another "fantasy" thread, but that's one of the reasons this site is cool. To start, anyone saying Hagler would easily beat Lamotta...just go away cuz it would never have happened. This would have been Haglers toughest fight by far. And, possibly his most humiliating loss. Two pressure fighters that would never say die. Btw, what the hell happened to all the tough Italian fighters ( don't F w/ me Snoops !)..... HAGLER WINS

In July 1943 Jake LaMotta faced Fritzie Zivic in the second of their several encounters. The Bronx Bull failed to rage as Zvic kept him off balance with stiff jabs. He managed to eke out scorecard wins only in rounds 2, 7 and 9. Juse ONE MONTH earlier, he had been declared winner over the very same Zivic, but the decision was soundly booed. The Associated Press had that first fight 7-3 for Zivic. It was also in 1943 that LaMotta faced Sugar Ray Robinson twice in a span of 21 days! Feb 5 and Feb 26! LaMotta took the first on UD (Robinson's first defeat! and, Jake's only win against Sugar Ray) but Sugar Ray avenged that in their second 1943 encounter. Robinson had actually defeated LaMotta once before, in their first ever (Oct. 1942) meeting. LaMotta tipped the scale for that contest 12 pounds heavier than Sugar Ray (157 to 145). Their last meeting was for the World Middleweight crown in Chicago on Feb. 14,1951, where LaMotta was TKO'd in the 13th in what the press dubbed at that time as the "Saint Valentines Day Massacre". La Motta has been quoted as saying, "I fought Sugar Ray so often, I got diabetes!" But they only met once with any kind of world title at stake. Sugar Ray was not the only fighter against whom the Bull had multiple meetings. He had quite a number against Bob Murphy, Robert Villamain, Laurent Dauthuille, Jose Basora, Tommy Bell, Zivic, Lorenzo Strickland, Frankie Jamison, Jimmy Reeves, Johnny Morris....To some of those mentioned, he lost some and won some. He had lost to Dauthuille in Feb 1949 in Montreal but in July 1950, he KO'd Dauthuille in the 15th to successfully defend the World Middleweight crown for the second time in Detroit. But he trailed in all the scorecards up to the point of the KO. That bout was The Ring's Fight of the Year-1950. LaMotta's aliases, "The Bronx Bull" and "The Ragin' Bull", evoke the vision of him taking out everyone he has faced; just ran roughshod over most of his opponents. His record does not quite bear this out: he had less than half of his wins by KO (83-19-4 with 30 KO's). :o Unlike Hagler, LaMotta was not a highly-skilled fighter; he had LOADS of trouble when confronted by the really skilled ones like Sugar Ray, Dauthuille, Villamain and Basora. He was closer to Rocky Marciano than to Joe Louis in style; though obviously without much of Marciano's punch. What he had a lot of was HEART and that counts for very, very much! :) Trivia: La Motta took a dive, by his own admission much later, against Billy Fox, but it was a strange "dive". He never hit the floor! He was counted out on his feet in the 4th! :D Another trivia: Zivic holds the dubious distinction of being the only fighter who had at one time been champ with the most number of career defeats: 65! He finished his active boxing life with a record of 157-65-10 (232 fights, all told!). He was a boxer--even a fancy dan-- who was reported as having merely toyed with some of his opponents. But he had a better KO rate than the Ragin' Bull: in excess of half of all his wins came by way of KO. (80)

Hagler by a tought 15 round decision.

Hagler would win.

Hagler by a close decision. LaMotta is an under-rated boxer and was a great body puncher but people forget Hagler also had excellent boxing skills along with great speed and movement in his prime. I think Hagler's faster hands and better movement get a him a very close nod, but man would this be a war . . .

How can you list Haglers opponents and leave out John Mugabi? He was a devestating puncher and Hagler took his shots no problem! Yep, you're right! I have that fight and watch it every so often. A brutal war and one of Hagler's toughest tests. However, I'd pick a fight with him before I would SRR...

How can you list Haglers opponents and leave out John Mugabi? He was a devestating puncher and Hagler took his shots no problem!

Damned exciting fight, Hagler just skilled enough to edge it out. It will be a brawl, but Hagler I believe brawls more skillfully.

italian250... Not saying Hagler fought in a better era than LaMotta.. But, don't forget about Hagler's comp BEFORE he won the title. He came through Philly to face Willie Monroe, Boogaloo Watts, Bennie Briscoe, & Cyclone Hart. These are the fights that made him the complete fighter he was. He lost a couple...learned from them, & made the most of the experience. Gotcha..I'm not saying HAgler "cakewalked" his way to a world title. But to say his era was "better" competiton-wise is just wrong. Hagler IS a man's fighter. Blue collar badass, plain and simple. And to me rates higher than Lamotta in the grand scheme of things. Actually...maybe even #1. But, he didn't fight SRR 5 times and he also didn't fight 106 times, many of those every 2-3 weeks! Still....what a fight!

italian250... Not saying Hagler fought in a better era than LaMotta.. But, don't forget about Hagler's comp BEFORE he won the title. He came through Philly to face Willie Monroe, Boogaloo Watts, Bennie Briscoe, & Cyclone Hart. These are the fights that made him the complete fighter he was. He lost a couple...learned from them, & made the most of the experience.

hagler fought in a better era against better fighters...hagler owns lamotta This could possibly be one of the more laughable comments I have seen on here. That is actually one of the knocks against Hagler. His opposition. Alan Minter, Vito Antuofermo, Mustafa Hamsho, Fulgencio Obelmejias, Tony Sibson, Wilfred Scypion, and Juan Roldan??? These were Haglers opponents. Yes, he did fight Hearns and Duran..and to me the Leonard fight doesn't even count as it was way past BOTH their primes. That fight should've happened around 1984. Now Lamotta...rather than listing names that wont mean anything to you cuz you don't know the era, I'll just say that he fought EVERYONE and fought them every other week....

Hagler's jackhammer right jab, lefty stance, & better combinations would get him a decision win. No chance of a KO here, as both (to me) are #'s 1 & 2 on the "all-time best chins" list.

jake lamotta

Sorry for another "fantasy" thread, but that's one of the reasons this site is cool. To start, anyone saying Hagler would easily beat Lamotta...just go away cuz it would never have happened. This would have been Haglers toughest fight by far. And, possibly his most humiliating loss. Two pressure fighters that would never say die. Btw, what the hell happened to all the tough Italian fighters ( don't F w/ me Snoops !)..... I think hagler would pull it out from Lamotta, Hagler moved a lot better then Lamotta....Hagler would have the extra edge......I believe it would be a war and Lamotta would take more punishment and Hagler would pull out a Long 15 round decision.