And we know this how? Jones never fought anyone on Lamotta's level who was in-prime and in-shape. No disrespect to Jones but his resume wasn't the strongest and I'm being charitable.
And we know this how? Jones never fought anyone on Lamotta's level who was in-prime and in-shape. No disrespect to Jones but his resume wasn't the strongest and I'm being charitable.
Poet
Lamotta didn't have the power or speed of Jones and he used his face to block punches. Jones being as big a puncher as he is with his lights out speed mixed with the fact that Lamotta will use his face to block big shots spells disaster for Jake.
Lamotta didn't have the power or speed of Jones and he used his face to block punches. Jones being as big a puncher as he is with his lights out speed mixed with the fact that Lamotta will use his face to block big shots spells disaster for Jake.
Robinson had a pretty fair dose of speed and power himself.....check out the Graziano fight. Robinson also beat Lamotta 5 out of 6.
Still, triangle theories really don't work in boxing: Saying Jones would never lose to Lamotta therefore he's better than Robinson is akin to saying Mike Tyson would have never lost to Leon Spinks therefore Tyson is better than Muhammed Ali.....I can easily turn that around and say Ali would have never lost to Buster Douglas OR struggle with Pinklon Thomas and Bonecrusher Smith. Any triangle like that can be turned around which is why they don't work.
Look up him vs sammy angott george cliff tony freddie valentine andy nonnels and tony ancona Dykes,same obsolete tech and flaws as the older one that fought gene/jake/joey and others,novices compared to 70s-90s
Comment