Hopkins vs Lamotta

[ИATAS]

Hopkins never beat a MW even close to the level of Jake Lamotta.

Jake, on the other hand, beat ATG Middleweights. Skilled ones and big ones.

yes he beat ATG's of that era but name one like 6'1 bernard hopkins.

we're talking head to head here, not resume vs resume.

[ИATAS]

Give me Jake Lamotta anyday of the week. Hopkins made a name off of fighting under sized big name fighters. When Hopkins fought legitimate opponents he lost, even to the caliber of fighter that is Joe Calzaghe.

The only loss hopkins has under the age of 40 was to Roy Jones and Roy Jones would have easily beat Lamotta himself. Bringing up Calzaghe is silly when we're talking about prime vs prime.

[IronDanHamza]

Give me Jake Lamotta anyday of the week. Hopkins made a name off of fighting under sized big name fighters. When Hopkins fought legitimate opponents he lost, even to the caliber of fighter that is Joe Calzaghe.

Bernard is a good fighter but his "skills" and "ring tactics" that he receives praise for all not as good as people would believe.

Jake Lamotta was just a different kind of fighter.

I think Hopkins has great skills and IQ and Tactics.

What I think is overrated is his "old school" style and being getting "nasty".

A couple comments here about Hopkins getting nasty with Lamotta. I personally find that laughable. If Hopkins tried to get nasty with Lamotta he wouldn't come out on top and woulod be at a huge disadvantage.

It's of course a winnable fight for Hopkins, I could see a UD for Hopkins especially in a 12 Round fight but again if he got nasty he'd come up short, no doubt about it.

Can you imagine Jake Lamotta crying and complaing over someone rabbit punching him? Or rolling around on the canvass after being pushed over? Never.

Lamotta may have taken a dive but those kind of antics are simply not in his DNA. He was nasty in every sense of the word.

If Hopkins tried to pull that **** with Lamotta, it's not going to go well for him.

[ИATAS]

and man, the 37+ hopkins was a lot better than the younger one... true story...

hopkins prime, when he was still at his physical peak and mentally as smart as he became, was around 1999-2002. He started to decline sometime after that, even Robert Allen said he wasn't the same fighter when he fought him the 3rd time in 2004. It's absurd to think a 40 year old fighter is still prime.

[IronDanHamza]

yes he beat ATG's of that era but name one like 6'1 bernard hopkins.

we're talking head to head here, not resume vs resume.

I can't think of any fighters he fought at 6'1 but he beat exceptionally skilled and slick fighters.

I know we're talking H2H but I think it's foolish to rule out Lamotta when he is far and beyond better than any MW Hopkins has beaten in his career.

That doesn't necessairly means he loses, of course. I'd lean on Hopkins personally. Especially in a 12 round fight.

[ИATAS]

I think Hopkins has great skills and IQ and Tactics.

What I think is overrated is his "old school" style and being getting "nasty".

A couple comments here about Hopkins getting nasty with Lamotta. I personally find that laughable. If Hopkins tried to get nasty with Lamotta he wouldn't come out on top and woulod be at a huge disadvantage.

It's of course a winnable fight for Hopkins, I could see a UD for Hopkins especially in a 12 Round fight but again if he got nasty he'd come up short, no doubt about it.

Can you imagine Jake Lamotta crying and complaing over someone rabbit punching him? Or rolling around on the canvass after being pushed over? Never.

Lamotta may have taken a dive but those kind of antics are simply not in his DNA. He was nasty in every sense of the word.

If Hopkins tried to pull that **** with Lamotta, it's not going to go well for him.

When did hopkins pull any of those tactics in his prime? He "rolled around" against Roy Jones and Calzaghe to catch a breather or whatever because he was old as hell. Again I remind you we're talking prime vs prime. Hopkins could get dirty if he wanted to and I don't see how that's laughable at all.

[ИATAS]

I can't think of any fighters he fought at 6'1 but he beat excpetionally skilled and slick fighters.

Thanks for answering the question. Lamotta never fought anyone like Hopkins.

[ИATAS]

show me a fight of examples of how lamotta would be effective against hopkins. I just don't see 5'8 lamotta coming forward, jab or not and being effective against hopkins lateral movement and his ability to clinch and smother at will. How would lamotta get his shots off effectively?

[IronDanHamza]

When did hopkins pull any of those tactics in his prime? He "rolled around" against Roy Jones and Calzaghe to catch a breather or whatever because he was old as hell. Again I remind you we're talking prime vs prime. Hopkins could get dirty if he wanted to and I don't see how that's laughable at all.

Passed his prime or not he still did it. It's something Lamotta doesn't have in his DNA whether he's 22 or 92 it doesn't matter that's where Lamotta would have a big advantage.

He did the same thing in his prime albeit he was legitiamtely injured but again it's something Lamotta wouldn't do. Do I blame Hopkins? Not at all. Just seperating the differences between them in that regard and how Hopkins 'old school' and 'nastiness' is overrated IMO.

Of course Hopkins can get dirty when he wants but to suggest he would have the upperhand in that regard with Lamotta is laughable IMO. Hopkins has the tools to beat Lamotta but getting into a match of roughhosue tactics isn't how he does it.

[IronDanHamza]

Thanks for answering the question. Lamotta never fought anyone like Hopkins.

Why does it matter he's 6'1 though?

He's fought and beat skilled MW's. ATG skilled MW's and ATG skilled fighters.