Roy Jones Jr Or Jake Lamotta?

[Oriachim]

La motta is over-rated, simple as that...

[TheGreatA]

La motta is over-rated, simple as that...

If only it was. But on the Boxing History section you'll have to elaborate.

[Oriachim]

Well, i'm not trolling or anything but generally I believe he was high over-rated... why? because of his film "raging bull". He lost lots of fights, 19 fights? sure hes been through a lot of wars and crap but sugar ray for example in his first 160 fights lost only 1 fight. Jake La Mota won only one world title, and even then he was quite lucky to win the fight from what I got told, and he didn't even hold the title for to long. He was also over-rated because of his one victory from sugar ray, even though Jake lost most of the fights.

[Oriachim]

Well, i'm not trolling or anything but generally I believe he was high over-rated... why? because of his film "raging bull". He lost lots of fights, 19 fights? sure hes been through a lot of wars and crap but sugar ray for example in his first 160 fights lost only 1 fight. Jake La Mota won only one world title, and even then he was quite lucky to win the fight from what I got told, and he didn't even hold the title for to long. He was also over-rated because of his one victory from sugar ray, even though Jake lost most of the fights.

His defence also let him down, sure he was better at slipping than Ricky Hatton but he needed some defence because he had almost no power. I agree Jake has an amazing chin.

[TheGreatA]

Well, i'm not trolling or anything but generally I believe he was high over-rated... why? because of his film "raging bull". He lost lots of fights, 19 fights? sure hes been through a lot of wars and crap but sugar ray for example in his first 160 fights lost only 1 fight. Jake La Mota won only one world title, and even then he was quite lucky to win the fight from what I got told, and he didn't even hold the title for to long. He was also over-rated because of his one victory from sugar ray, even though Jake lost most of the fights.

You do understand how difficult it was to get world title shots during the Second World War? The titles were frozen and LaMotta was also frozen out of the title picture by the mob, until he took a dive against Billy Fox. During his 1940's prime, LaMotta only lost to three men, Fritzie Zivic (whom he beat 3 out of 4), Sugar Ray Robinson (arguably the greatest of all time) and Lloyd Marshall, the number 1 ranked light heavyweight at the time.

LaMotta wasn't lucky to win the title in my opinion. Cerdan was injured but that was only after LaMotta had already battered him from pillar to post in the first round of the fight. The determined, well-trained Jake who fought Cerdan would have been tough to beat for any middleweight, he had been waiting for his title shot for 7 years, 7 years after being rated the number 1 middleweight contender in the world. The title holder Tony Zale had gone to the army at the time and when he came back from the war, elected to give the inferior Rocky Graziano a title shot instead of LaMotta.

LaMotta gave Robinson the hardest fights of his career and all of their early bouts were close, especially the third and fifth fights where Robinson was knocked down. Only in their sixth fight, where Robinson admitted that LaMotta was weight-drained and had slowed down, was he able to decisively beat LaMotta.

[Cassius Liston]

Lets just stick to the question "Roy or Jake"...........
Roy because of the weights his unbelievable handspeed...his determination to carry on even when things are bleak....thats makes him great in my eyes...oh and For being a generally nice person...and the gold he got robbed in the 88 olympics

[AKATheMack]

Tarver was good enough to beat Roy Jones, wasn't he? Yes, we all know he was washed up, weight-drained.
There is no comparison between the careers of Jake LaMotta and Antonio Tarver. LaMotta is one of the top 10 greatest middleweights of all time in my opinion while Tarver probably doesn't make my top 20 greatest light heavyweights.

I haven't seen enough footage of LaMotta to argue. From what I've seen of LaMotta is a tough as nails guy, with a great chin, who leaves his hands too low and leads with his head. I feel he was able to use his size to his advantage enough to beat SRR once in 6 fights. If you have more knowledge on the subject I'd be happy to hear it.

[TheGreatA]

I haven't seen enough footage of LaMotta to argue. From what I've seen of LaMotta is a tough as nails guy, with a great chin, who leaves his hands too low and leads with his head. I feel he was able to use his size to his advantage enough to beat SRR once in 6 fights. If you have more knowledge on the subject I'd be happy to hear it.

Physically he was one of the strongest middleweights, and during his prime was almost a tireless machine who would chase opponents down, work them to the body and overwhelm them. Technically he was sound, far from the face first fighter that he is made out to be, but he was an all-out aggressive fighter who was willing to absorb a few punches in order to land his own. He had an effective jab, good head movement, great inside fighter who put together combinations very well. The one criticism about him would be his rather flat feet but Robinson said he was quicker in the 1940's than in the footage that we have of him.

“I couldn’t match strength with LaMotta,” Robinson said afterward. “But he was slower than he had been six years earlier. That made him an easier target. My jab had puffed up his face and I had hit him with quite a few body shots. His punches had lost their zing.”

No one ever managed to hurt him at his peak, including Bob Satterfield who knocked out 220 lb heavyweights, but he could hurt his opponents despite his lack of KO's. LaMotta fought mostly against top 10 ranked opposition, rarely any "tomato cans", and thus lacked the "padding" on his record that many of today's fighters have. Any man who can knock down Ray Robinson and Tommy Yarosz has to be a pretty good puncher, not to mention the several top 10 rated contenders that he legitimately knocked out.

Trainer Gil Clancy states his opinion on Jake LaMotta:


5:50

[AKATheMack]

Physically he was one of the strongest middleweights, and during his prime was almost a tireless machine who would chase opponents down, work them to the body and overwhelm them. Technically he was sound, far from the face first fighter that he is made out to be, but he was an all-out aggressive fighter who was willing to absorb a few punches in order to land his own. He had an effective jab, good head movement, great inside fighter who put together combinations very well. The one criticism about him would be his rather flat feet but Robinson said he was quicker in the 1940's than in the footage that we have of him.

“I couldn’t match strength with LaMotta,” Robinson said afterward. “But he was slower than he had been six years earlier. That made him an easier target. My jab had puffed up his face and I had hit him with quite a few body shots. His punches had lost their zing.”

No one ever managed to hurt him at his peak, including Bob Satterfield who knocked out 220 lb heavyweights, but he could hurt his opponents despite his lack of KO's. LaMotta fought mostly against top 10 ranked opposition, rarely any "tomato cans", and thus lacked the "padding" on his record that many of today's fighters have. Any man who can knock down Ray Robinson and Tommy Yarosz has to be a pretty good puncher, not to mention the several top 10 rated contenders that he legitimately knocked out.

That's the only problem I have is that he was an extremely strong MW who happened to outmuscle a 145lb SRR only once. I don't doubt his greatness as I know I didnt see the best version of him, but I dont believe his one win over a much smaller SRR holds as much weight as I tend to hear.

[TheGreatA]

That's the only problem I have is that he was an extremely strong MW who happened to outmuscle a 145lb SRR only once. I don't doubt his greatness as I know I didnt see the best version of him, but I dont believe his one win over a much smaller SRR holds as much weight as I tend to hear.

Yes, if he only had a single win over Ray Robinson then I agree that he wouldn't deserve to be rated as highly either, but he defeated countless top ranked middleweights also. He was the only man to defeat Ray Robinson in the 1940's and he did have other close fights with Robinson as well, ones that could have arguably gone his way. He proved that he was not a Buster Douglas over his career by defeating some of the best fighters of the 1940's.

I'm not saying that he was anywhere near as great as Sugar Ray Robinson but it was no fluke that he defeated Robinson.