Was Lamotta A Top 10 MW all time

[Willow The Wisp]

Zale worked in a stronger era by far.

[IronDanHamza]

I think teasing out the career quality assesment score gap between Tony Zale and **** Tiger, and the other 7 who are seated in between then on my list is done with a microscope.
Debate and defense of concept is a traditional message board activity, and far be it from little ol' me to claim that it shouldn't be. Furthermore, if you post a big rank list of anything, you should know your getting the stick.

However....
When terms like "Righttttttt" and "You can't honestly believe" sneak into the dialog; you face a decision point.

My decision is: A) I often enjoy your posting.
B) I enjoy mine too. C) I support your right to respectfully disagree.

A boxing writer over 50 years, I scarcely have enough energy left to debate my own wife.

Yeah because I just can't understand your position.

I didn't mean any offence by it, despite I will say being slightly baffled.

Tony Zale over **** Tiger? How?????

Not that Zale is the only one, there's quite a few picks in there that I can't understand.

Tiger has to be minimum Top 15 in my book. Outside the Top 20 is bizarre and outside the Top 25 is scandalous.

[IronDanHamza]

Zale worked in a stronger era by far.

Well yeah you can say the 40's MW era was better but how many of those guys did Zale beat?

He didn't beat Moore, Charles, Burley, Williams, Lamotta, Lytell, Basora etc who were there or there abouts when Zale was so he doesn't get credit for being in the same era as them if he didn't fight them.

The ranked guys he beat were few and far between, not very many. He only had 1 defence against Graziano.

His resume is weak, certainly in comparison to Tiger's.

[Willie Pep 229]

Well yeah you can say the 40's MW era was better but how many of those guys did Zale beat?

He didn't beat Moore, Charles, Burley, Williams, Lamotta, Lytell, Basora etc who were there or there abouts when Zale was so he doesn't get credit for being in the same era as them if he didn't fight them.

The ranked guys he beat were few and far between, not very many. He only had 1 defence against Graziano.

His resume is weak, certainly in comparison to Tiger's.

Zale was a Midwestern based fighter who won part of the MW title (NBA) in early 1941. Then unified the title with a decision over Georgie Abrams at The Garden in November 1941, just before America entered the War. Making it his first major New York appearance.

Because he stayed in the Midwest, avoiding New York, he was never going to be able to build much of a pre-title resume.

When he was separated in '45 his exciting trilogy with Graziano '46-'48 then made him a bit of a legend.

Had there been no War I suspect he would have lost the title to either Holman Wiiliams, Burley, SRR or La Motta rather quickly.

My two cents.

P.S. Like many fighters he had to give up what may have been his best four years. We will probably never know what could have been.

[The D3vil]

Yeah, Tony Zale's from my town and no way in HELL am I putting him over **** Tiger.

And WTF with Emille Griffith? Way too low.

I'd argue that you got Leonard, and Hearns way too high.

They weren't there long enough to be ATG MWs

[GhostofDempsey]

Yes he is top ten. Handed Robinson his first loss and was robbed in another of their bouts. Fought him very close in three other encounters and was doing well in fist half of their final match. He fought several of the black murderer’s row such as Holman Williams, Lloyd Marshall, Bert Lytell, while also defeating Zivic, Satterfield, Cerdan, and Reeves. Not many MWs who can match that resume.

[Slugfester]

Is Jackson really that low?

[Ivich]

Yes he is top ten. Handed Robinson his first loss and was robbed in another of their bouts. Fought him very close in three other encounters and was doing well in fist half of their final match. He fought several of the black murderer’s row such as Holman Williams, Lloyd Marshall, Bert Lytell, while also defeating Zivic, Satterfield, Cerdan, and Reeves. Not many MWs who can match that resume.

Robinson was conceding16lbs to him! He fought Williams,Marshall, and Lytell, but the only one he beat Lytell , was giving him7lbs .
Satterfield was a 22years old novice,
Cerdan retired with an injury.
Jake beat Reeves who also beat him.
He beat Zivic but lost to him twice, and Zivic was a welterweight who gave him 6 1/2lbs and 10 1/2lbs and beat him. That said I pick him to beat Zale,and if he isn't top ten, he isnt far away from it.

[GhostofDempsey]

Robinson was conceding16lbs to him! He fought Williams,Marshall, and Lytell, but the only one he beat Lytell , was giving him7lbs .
Satterfield was a 22years old novice,
Cerdan retired with an injury.
Jake beat Reeves who also beat him.
He beat Zivic but lost to him twice, and Zivic was a welterweight who gave him 6 1/2lbs and 10 1/2lbs and beat him. That said I pick him to beat Zale,and if he isn't top ten, he isnt far away from it.

McVey and Jeannette were young novices when they fought Johnson, Langford was 21 when they fought, McVey 19 and 20. You've never caveated any of your Johnson posts with those facts. Yet for LaMotta you dug deep to find any way to tarnish his wins.

[billeau2]

I don't like using the "10" limitation unless you are looking for an argument.

But he is definitely an ATG MW. If you have to extend your list to 12 or 15 to get him on the list you probably should.

It took 63 rounds for one of them (SRR) to finally dominate the other, and that was a prime SRR.

P.S. Not "you" particularly, I meant that rhetorically.

I agree with this approach.