Dude, LaMotta lost to bums on a regular basis. He was very tough but not anywhere near Pavlik's class.
lamotta fought to pay the bills. it was his job. he was rough tough and he did it because he had to, not because he wanted to. i dont see pavlik beating him out of his paycheck any day. dont get me wrong. pavlik is good and i am grateful to him for deposing that fraud taylor (as i said earlier in the thread). i also only think lamotta would beat him in an old school fight were the ref lets it go and he would need 15 to do it. if it were a modern day 12 rounder with over protective refs pavlik wins.
Pavlik's pin point accurate power shots, natural advantage in size, height and reach would be too much for Lamotta. He was 5'8 to Pavlik 6'2 and would be dealing with a bigger guy that knows how to use reach to his advantage. In order to beat Pavlik, you would have to either have more power or have excellent boxing ability and he doesn't have any of those attributes. Jake was never a big ****er to begin with and he had little skill. He mainly got by with his toughness and that would work against him on this match up. Pavlik being out lasted remains to be seen because he has went 12 rounds at a very hard pace and was not fatigued by no means. He is superior to Jake in every area. Pavlik would keep Jake at bay, go to the body and slowly wear him down and out.
Power, Underrated Boxing Skills, Workrate, Intensity, Great Inside Fighting. It all points to Pavlik.
Pavlik is not a great fighter, but he is a very good fighter and well rounded. It will take someone very ring wise like Calzaghe to beat him. Like I said, Pavlik is sloppy, but he gets the job done.
LaMotta was not a big puncher. Are people watching Raging Bull and thinking he's some big puncher who didn't have any skills??
Both are wrong.
LaMotta was tough as nails but had skills and defense. He was known for hiding behind his shoulders effective to slip punches. Joe Louis called him "Slippery Jake". Sure he was a punching bag when he was dead tired against Robinson in the 6th fight, but that doesn't represent him as a whole.
Billy Kilgore 30-18-4
Danny Nardico 43-8-4
Norman Hayes 21-7-1
Bob Murphy 58-5-1
Robert Villemain 37-3-1
Laurent Dauthuille 28-7-3
Billy Fox 42-1-0
Cecil Hudson 56-21-4
Lloyd Marshall 47-9-3
Fritzie Zivic 127-36-7 Lorenzo Strickland 5-13-2
Nate Bolden 34-12-4
Jimmy Reeves 17-3-0
LaMotta got beat by all those guys, but he'd beat Pavlik right?
Get real.
LaMotta never lost to Strickland and the Billy Fox fight was famously a dive.
The Murphy, Hayes, Nardico & Kilgore fights were after LaMotta was completely done as a fighter, some were early in his career (Reeves & Bolden), the other losses were close split decisions or avenged later.
It's no shame losing a split decision to a hall of famer like Fritzie Zivic, especially when you defeat him twice afterwards.
LaMotta beat top fighters from welterweight to light heavyweight and had 6 great fights with Sugar Ray Robinson.
Yes, he lost 5 times and only won once but they were all close fights, their last fight (when LaMotta was TKO'd) was the only decisive one.
LaMotta's punches lacked power but he wore his opponents down and outworked them. He did score a few comeback KO's (the Dauthuille one was the most famous) and knocked down Ray Robinson in two of their fights.
LaMotta vs Robinson. The fight was close early on but became a beating later.
LaMotta expended all of his energy in this round. He really went for the KO at 01:11 but could not get it.
Zertuche was 5'8 and he fought a decent fight against Pavlik.
Height was not really a problem for LaMotta, Bob Satterfield for example was 6'2 and punched like a heavyweight but LaMotta KO'd him cold in the 7th round.
Comment