BoxRec

Nero3000 wrote:

silkov wrote:

Nero3000 wrote: No dear, Jake didn't break his hand in the second round. It's "ignored" cuz it never happened. Watch the films.

Jake did not almost KO Cerdan in the first round either. Watch the films.

All you are doing is regurgitating discredited myths perpetuated by LaMotta-loonies, many of whom haunt these boards. You might wanna do some research and arm yourself with some "facts" before you state them.

Try the NewYork Times buddy, their reporter saw Jakes hand after the fight, the hand was broken fact, but Jake still pasted Cedan all night fact!... you wouldn't know a fact if you married one!.... and yes I have the films as well...

He goes to the NY Times for an unbiased account of a LaMotta fight. Yer as classic as Brock!*L* That's like going to the Casablanca Times for a report on a Cerdan fight. Show me reports from several papers that support your claims. You can't, because there are none(and before you say it, yes I have posted unbiased accounts. In past posts on this subject. Look 'em up for reference).

Yes, Jake had a swollen knuckle after the fight. How do you know it was broken in round 2?? He's still whacking away with it. Doesn't appear to be in any pain to me. Sure it didn't happen in the later rounds?

If you had the films(which I doubt) you wouldn't be perpetuating these silly myths("LaMotta almost KO'd him in the first!" "Jake broke his hand in round 2!"). There's no evidence of it or anything else you say in the films.

He hurt Cedan badly in the first and had him holding and then Cedan fell down when Jake pushed him away, ...this is supposedly when Cedan hurt his shoulder. Funny how Liston is criticised for quitting against Ali with a bad shoulder while Marcel is praised for it. What evidence have you got that Marcel even hurt his shoulder?... if you don't believe that Jake hurt his hand. Youre just a totally biased Lamotta hater, its really rather sad...

Oh and BTW, beating top contenders like Georgie Abrams, Anton Raadik, Harold Green, Holman Williams(old, but still formidable) and Lavern Roach is not what I would call having a "padded" record.

is that all u got???? hell thats nothing

out of 109 wins, thats all u can come up with??


-raadick, lavern roach, and were no world beaters.


-georgie abrams was past his prime, he was coming off a 4 year layoff from the war




if thats all u can come up with out of 109 wins, cerdan has a very padded record. lamotta beat far better competition btw. he proved himself more than cerdan. anyone can look good beating up those 2nd rate european stiffs.

tony zale over jake lamotta? please this just goes to show u how much of a cerdan nuthugger and lamotta hater u are. ur so angry that lamotta beat cerdan.


zale would have been thrashed by jake lamotta. zale avoided every top contender pre WW 11 and post WW 11. zale could never have kept lamotta off him.




* lamotta was the only WHITE fighter of the 1940s too consistenly take on the top black middlewieghts of the murderers row.





nero, u must understand. just cause jake used his left during the fight didnt mean it was hurt. jake hurt his hand badly but continued to use it cause he was a true warrior who refused to feel pain. lamotta sucked it up and used it the rest of the fight cause he wanted to win.

vitali klischkos hurt his shoulder in round 2 vs bryd, but he continued to use that arm throughout the fight. just cause a man uses his arm, doesnt mean its not hurt.

jake simply sucked it up more than marcel did



the first round of lamotta-cerdan tells it all. lamotta outphysicaled cerdan all over the ring staggering cerdanand then injuring cerdan. this goes to show me lamotta would always be too physical for cerdan.



nero,

who did cerdan beat to warrant such a high ranking? his record is padded beyong belief. the reason i rate cerdan so highly is based on him looking very good on film. but the man is very unproven.


he lost to jake lamotta, deal with it. watch the film, jake is wailing on cerdan the whole fight. it wasnt close.

silkov wrote:

Nero3000 wrote:

silkov wrote: Try the NewYork Times buddy, their reporter saw Jakes hand after the fight, the hand was broken fact, but Jake still pasted Cedan all night fact!... you wouldn't know a fact if you married one!.... and yes I have the films as well...

He goes to the NY Times for an unbiased account of a LaMotta fight. Yer as classic as Brock!*L* That's like going to the Casablanca Times for a report on a Cerdan fight. Show me reports from several papers that support your claims. You can't, because there are none(and before you say it, yes I have posted unbiased accounts. In past posts on this subject. Look 'em up for reference).

Yes, Jake had a swollen knuckle after the fight. How do you know it was broken in round 2?? He's still whacking away with it. Doesn't appear to be in any pain to me. Sure it didn't happen in the later rounds?

If you had the films(which I doubt) you wouldn't be perpetuating these silly myths("LaMotta almost KO'd him in the first!" "Jake broke his hand in round 2!"). There's no evidence of it or anything else you say in the films.

He hurt Cedan badly in the first and had him holding and then Cedan fell down when Jake pushed him away, ...this is supposedly when Cedan hurt his shoulder. Funny how Liston is criticised for quitting against Ali with a bad shoulder while Marcel is praised for it. What evidence have you got that Marcel even hurt his shoulder?... if you don't believe that Jake hurt his hand. Youre just a totally biased Lamotta hater, its really rather sad...

he is a hater

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

silkov wrote:

Nero3000 wrote: He goes to the NY Times for an unbiased account of a LaMotta fight. Yer as classic as Brock!*L* That's like going to the Casablanca Times for a report on a Cerdan fight. Show me reports from several papers that support your claims. You can't, because there are none(and before you say it, yes I have posted unbiased accounts. In past posts on this subject. Look 'em up for reference).

Yes, Jake had a swollen knuckle after the fight. How do you know it was broken in round 2?? He's still whacking away with it. Doesn't appear to be in any pain to me. Sure it didn't happen in the later rounds?

If you had the films(which I doubt) you wouldn't be perpetuating these silly myths("LaMotta almost KO'd him in the first!" "Jake broke his hand in round 2!"). There's no evidence of it or anything else you say in the films.

He hurt Cedan badly in the first and had him holding and then Cedan fell down when Jake pushed him away, ...this is supposedly when Cedan hurt his shoulder. Funny how Liston is criticised for quitting against Ali with a bad shoulder while Marcel is praised for it. What evidence have you got that Marcel even hurt his shoulder?... if you don't believe that Jake hurt his hand. Youre just a totally biased Lamotta hater, its really rather sad...

he is a hater

Yeah, Neros a Zero!... 8)

Nero3000 wrote:

Collins2000 wrote:

Arbachakov wrote:Cerdan was really a Welterweight.It's difficult to imagine he would have the beating of lamotta every time when the superior Robinson was run so close in most of their fights.

With some of the hyperbole here you would think Cerdan was light years better than Robinson.

It's likely that if Cerdan and Lamotta engaged in a series of fights that they would all be gruelling and highly competitive.

Not in here, Arbachakov. This is the twilight zone of boxing. Long held opinions have become fact to many of these punters.

Marcel Cerdan is just the latest to be have undergone a semi-religious transformation from decent champ to immortal and unbeatable divinity.

Hey, and it's not just well-known fighters who get this elevation. Check out some of those posts about the inter-war brit boxers and how, if they'd been given a shot at the US fighters, the record books would look so different. Fantasy, of course, but these fellows believe it.

Then, of course, we come to Klondike. Surely you know of him? Reputed to have been, according to our resident self-proclaimed boxing historian, a better heavyweight than George Foreman and Larry Holmes.

My old dad always use to say that the best comedians were those who keep a straight face when delivering their lines. I often think of that as I chuckle at some of the posts in here.

Actually, your semi-religious transformation quote applies to LaMotta far more than Cerdan. And proves how little you know about how Marcel was regarded in his day.

"Decent champ"? *LOL* Now THAT should give you a chuckle after you do your homework.

Ike Williams- a Cerdan contemporary- thought that Marcel would have beaten Robinson at his best.

Ezzard Charles- another Marcel contemporary- called him "The greatest fighter I've ever seen".

Chuckle away....

Nero, it's actually your pompous posturing that makes me chuckle.

Ignoring the hyperbole, La Motta beat the crap out of Cerdan.

Yet, in the fantasy world you inhabit, this has no relevance.

And you wonder why I find you amusing?

Ignoring the hyperbole, La Motta beat the crap out of Cerdan.

according to him, cerdan almost beat lamotta

silkov wrote:

Nero3000 wrote:

silkov wrote: Try the NewYork Times buddy, their reporter saw Jakes hand after the fight, the hand was broken fact, but Jake still pasted Cedan all night fact!... you wouldn't know a fact if you married one!.... and yes I have the films as well...

He goes to the NY Times for an unbiased account of a LaMotta fight. Yer as classic as Brock!*L* That's like going to the Casablanca Times for a report on a Cerdan fight. Show me reports from several papers that support your claims. You can't, because there are none(and before you say it, yes I have posted unbiased accounts. In past posts on this subject. Look 'em up for reference).

Yes, Jake had a swollen knuckle after the fight. How do you know it was broken in round 2?? He's still whacking away with it. Doesn't appear to be in any pain to me. Sure it didn't happen in the later rounds?

If you had the films(which I doubt) you wouldn't be perpetuating these silly myths("LaMotta almost KO'd him in the first!" "Jake broke his hand in round 2!"). There's no evidence of it or anything else you say in the films.

He hurt Cedan badly in the first and had him holding and then Cedan fell down when Jake pushed him away, ...this is supposedly when Cedan hurt his shoulder. Funny how Liston is criticised for quitting against Ali with a bad shoulder while Marcel is praised for it. What evidence have you got that Marcel even hurt his shoulder?... if you don't believe that Jake hurt his hand. Youre just a totally biased Lamotta hater, its really rather sad...

*sigh* More misinformation. I am now thoroughly convinced that you don't have nor have ever even seen the film of the fight.

[ What evidence have you got that Marcel even hurt his shoulder?... [/quote]





How about the FILM??? Is that evidence enough for you? How about several newspaper accounts that support what your own two eyes show you upon viewing the film?? That Cerdan is not using his best weapon(left hook) and instead merely chopping away at LaMotta with his right.

Good Lord guy. Do some research!

Try the NewYork Times buddy, their reporter saw Jakes hand after the fight, the hand was broken fact, but Jake still pasted Cedan all night fact!... you wouldn't know a fact if you married one!.... and yes I have the films as well...[/quote]

He goes to the NY Times for an unbiased account of a LaMotta fight. Yer as classic as Brock!*L* That's like going to the Casablanca Times for a report on a Cerdan fight. Show me reports from several papers that support your claims. You can't, because there are none(and before you say it, yes I have posted unbiased accounts. In past posts on this subject. Look 'em up for reference).

Yes, Jake had a swollen knuckle after the fight. How do you know it was broken in round 2?? He's still whacking away with it. Doesn't appear to be in any pain to me. Sure it didn't happen in the later rounds?

If you had the films(which I doubt) you wouldn't be perpetuating these silly myths("LaMotta almost KO'd him in the first!" "Jake broke his hand in round 2!"). There's no evidence of it or anything else you say in the films.[/quote]


He hurt Cedan badly in the first and had him holding and then Cedan fell down when Jake pushed him away, ...this is supposedly when Cedan hurt his shoulder. Funny how Liston is criticised for quitting against Ali with a bad shoulder while Marcel is praised for it. What evidence have you got that Marcel even hurt his shoulder?... if you don't believe that Jake hurt his hand. Youre just a totally biased Lamotta hater, its really rather sad...[/quote]




Marcel didn't quit in his corner. His corner stopped it because HE WAS UNABLE TO USE HIS LEFT ARM!!!!! Geez but you are obtuse on this subject. Again, you DO NOT have your facts together. Go do some research. Check out the LA, San Francisco, Chicago and Pittsburgh newspaper accounts of the bout(not the biased NY Times account that Brock so desperately clings to while ignoring all the other evidence).

And...I repeat for the last time: Jake had a hurt knuckle. You would too if you'd just been pounding someone with it for 10 rounds. You have shown me no proof(it's not in the papers or evident in the films) that Jake hurt it in the second round. Have you any?

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

Oh and BTW, beating top contenders like Georgie Abrams, Anton Raadik, Harold Green, Holman Williams(old, but still formidable) and Lavern Roach is not what I would call having a "padded" record.

is that all u got???? hell thats nothing

out of 109 wins, thats all u can come up with??


-raadick, lavern roach, and were no world beaters.


-georgie abrams was past his prime, he was coming off a 4 year layoff from the war




if thats all u can come up with out of 109 wins, cerdan has a very padded record. lamotta beat far better competition btw. he proved himself more than cerdan. anyone can look good beating up those 2nd rate european stiffs.

We've already been through this. I kill your arguments and then you scamper away and just look for the opportunity to regurgitate them later. Give it up. You're wrong.

Yeah, Jake proved he could take a beating. He proved that he was a terror when he fought Welterweights but usually lost when he fought the better middleweights. He proved that somehow a one-armed Frenchman can fight him for 10 rounds.

[quote="BrocktonBlockbuster49"]tony zale over jake lamotta? please this just goes to show u how much of a cerdan nuthugger and lamotta hater u are. ur so angry that lamotta beat cerdan.


zale would have been thrashed by jake lamotta. zale avoided every top contender pre WW 11 and post WW 11. zale could never have kept lamotta off him.


THRASHED? oH, YOU MEAN LIKE HOW HE THRASHED ALL THE GOOD MIDDLEWEIGHTS OF HIS ERA, RIGHT? LIKE LAURENT DAUTHUILLE, TIBERIO MITRI, ROBERT VILLEMAIN, FRITZIE ZIVIC(A WELTERWEIGHT) AND THE IMMORTAL CECIL HUDSON?





nero, u must understand. just cause jake used his left during the fight didnt mean it was hurt. jake hurt his hand badly but continued to use it cause he was a true warrior who refused to feel pain. lamotta sucked it up and used it the rest of the fight cause he wanted to win.


SHOW ME AN ACCOUNT NOT FROM YOUR BELOVED NY TIMES THAT SUPPORTS THIS. THAT JAKE HURT IT EARLY IN THE FIGHT.

the first round of lamotta-cerdan tells it all. lamotta outphysicaled cerdan all over the ring staggering cerdanand then injuring cerdan. this goes to show me lamotta would always be too physical for cerdan. NO THE ENTIRE FIGHT TELLS IT ALL. CERDAN HAS ONE USABLE ARM AND DUELS WITH JAKE. NUFF SAID.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

Oh and BTW, beating top contenders like Georgie Abrams, Anton Raadik, Harold Green, Holman Williams(old, but still formidable) and Lavern Roach is not what I would call having a "padded" record.

is that all u got???? hell thats nothing

out of 109 wins, thats all u can come up with??


-raadick, lavern roach, and were no world beaters.


-georgie abrams was past his prime, he was coming off a 4 year layoff from the war




if thats all u can come up with out of 109 wins, cerdan has a very padded record. lamotta beat far better competition btw. he proved himself more than cerdan. anyone can look good beating up those 2nd rate european stiffs.

Jake padded his record, too. With WELTERweights. Yup, big Jake loved to feast on those 147 lbers.....

He goes to the NY Times for an unbiased account of a LaMotta fight. Yer as classic as Brock!*L* That's like going to the Casablanca Times for a report on a Cerdan fight. Show me reports from several papers that support your claims. You can't, because there are none(and before you say it, yes I have posted unbiased accounts. In past posts on this subject. Look 'em up for reference).

Yes, Jake had a swollen knuckle after the fight. How do you know it was broken in round 2?? He's still whacking away with it. Doesn't appear to be in any pain to me. Sure it didn't happen in the later rounds?

If you had the films(which I doubt) you wouldn't be perpetuating these silly myths("LaMotta almost KO'd him in the first!" "Jake broke his hand in round 2!"). There's no evidence of it or anything else you say in the films.[/quote]


He hurt Cedan badly in the first and had him holding and then Cedan fell down when Jake pushed him away, ...this is supposedly when Cedan hurt his shoulder. Funny how Liston is criticised for quitting against Ali with a bad shoulder while Marcel is praised for it. What evidence have you got that Marcel even hurt his shoulder?... if you don't believe that Jake hurt his hand. Youre just a totally biased Lamotta hater, its really rather sad...[/quote]


he is a hater[/quote]

Yeah, Neros a Zero!... 8) [/quote]



Wow. That was clever. You write that one yourself? Great stuff. And witty too...

Collins2000 wrote:

Nero3000 wrote:

Collins2000 wrote:
Not in here, Arbachakov. This is the twilight zone of boxing. Long held opinions have become fact to many of these punters.

Marcel Cerdan is just the latest to be have undergone a semi-religious transformation from decent champ to immortal and unbeatable divinity.

Hey, and it's not just well-known fighters who get this elevation. Check out some of those posts about the inter-war brit boxers and how, if they'd been given a shot at the US fighters, the record books would look so different. Fantasy, of course, but these fellows believe it.

Then, of course, we come to Klondike. Surely you know of him? Reputed to have been, according to our resident self-proclaimed boxing historian, a better heavyweight than George Foreman and Larry Holmes.

My old dad always use to say that the best comedians were those who keep a straight face when delivering their lines. I often think of that as I chuckle at some of the posts in here.

Actually, your semi-religious transformation quote applies to LaMotta far more than Cerdan. And proves how little you know about how Marcel was regarded in his day.

"Decent champ"? *LOL* Now THAT should give you a chuckle after you do your homework.

Ike Williams- a Cerdan contemporary- thought that Marcel would have beaten Robinson at his best.

Ezzard Charles- another Marcel contemporary- called him "The greatest fighter I've ever seen".

Chuckle away....

Nero, it's actually your pompous posturing that makes me chuckle.

Ignoring the hyperbole, La Motta beat the crap out of Cerdan.

Yet, in the fantasy world you inhabit, this has no relevance.

And you wonder why I find you amusing?

Don't flatter yourself. I wonder nothing about you, except where you've done your research and where you get your info. Obviously a crippled(and biased) source.

"Pompous posturing"?*LOL* You must be a Brit....

Collins2000 wrote:

Nero3000 wrote:

Collins2000 wrote:
Not in here, Arbachakov. This is the twilight zone of boxing. Long held opinions have become fact to many of these punters.

Marcel Cerdan is just the latest to be have undergone a semi-religious transformation from decent champ to immortal and unbeatable divinity.

Hey, and it's not just well-known fighters who get this elevation. Check out some of those posts about the inter-war brit boxers and how, if they'd been given a shot at the US fighters, the record books would look so different. Fantasy, of course, but these fellows believe it.

Then, of course, we come to Klondike. Surely you know of him? Reputed to have been, according to our resident self-proclaimed boxing historian, a better heavyweight than George Foreman and Larry Holmes.

My old dad always use to say that the best comedians were those who keep a straight face when delivering their lines. I often think of that as I chuckle at some of the posts in here.

Actually, your semi-religious transformation quote applies to LaMotta far more than Cerdan. And proves how little you know about how Marcel was regarded in his day.

"Decent champ"? *LOL* Now THAT should give you a chuckle after you do your homework.

Ike Williams- a Cerdan contemporary- thought that Marcel would have beaten Robinson at his best.

Ezzard Charles- another Marcel contemporary- called him "The greatest fighter I've ever seen".

Chuckle away....

Nero, it's actually your pompous posturing that makes me chuckle.

Ignoring the hyperbole, La Motta beat the crap out of Cerdan.

Yet, in the fantasy world you inhabit, this has no relevance.

And you wonder why I find you amusing?

Your "semi-religious" transformation comment was a beaut.

And proves that you know next to nothing about how Marcel Cerdan was regarded in his day. I've given you examples. Where's yours? Have any? Or just a load of platitudes? That's OK, those are always easy to fall back on. Much easier than having your Mommy take you by the hand to your local library and doing some actual RESEARCH.

Oh, that pesky "R" word...

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

Ignoring the hyperbole, La Motta beat the crap out of Cerdan.

according to him, cerdan almost beat lamotta

why not? Jake was beaten several times. And by fighters not half as good as Cerdan. 50% of Cerdan goes ten rounds with Jake. I am convinced that 100% of Cerdan would be him.

Why was he favored for their initial fight and for the rematch?

Anyone who is interested in being forwarded the LA Times account of the Cerdan/LaMotta fight please post your email addy here or drop me a line:
[email protected]

I'm sure we can all agree that this is an unbiased account, Los Angeles being far from LaMotta's hometown and even farther from Cerdan's.

Nero3000 wrote:

Collins2000 wrote:

Nero3000 wrote: Actually, your semi-religious transformation quote applies to LaMotta far more than Cerdan. And proves how little you know about how Marcel was regarded in his day.

"Decent champ"? *LOL* Now THAT should give you a chuckle after you do your homework.

Ike Williams- a Cerdan contemporary- thought that Marcel would have beaten Robinson at his best.

Ezzard Charles- another Marcel contemporary- called him "The greatest fighter I've ever seen".

Chuckle away....

Nero, it's actually your pompous posturing that makes me chuckle.

Ignoring the hyperbole, La Motta beat the crap out of Cerdan.

Yet, in the fantasy world you inhabit, this has no relevance.

And you wonder why I find you amusing?

Your "semi-religious" transformation comment was a beaut.

And proves that you know next to nothing about how Marcel Cerdan was regarded in his day. I've given you examples. Where's yours? Have any? Or just a load of platitudes? That's OK, those are always easy to fall back on. Much easier than having your Mommy take you by the hand to your local library and doing some actual RESEARCH.

Oh, that pesky "R" word...

Of course I'm a brit. Can't you tell that by my witty and intelligent posts?


What examples were those you gave? One boxer said he was the best fighter he ever saw? That's your 'proof'?

For fekks sake, man, there is an article at CBZ where Tunney states that Dempsey would KO Marciano in 1 round without breaking a sweat. Rocky described Ali as a heavyweight Robinson. One former Brit world champ still claims Chris Eubank was "a fraud, nothing but a fraud". Just because they have boxed doesn't mean they aren't often wrong. And, like you, they can get caught up in a fantasy.

The fact remains that La Motta beat the snot out of Cerdan.

Cerdan was a decent champ in a competitive era. Not some superman who if he hadn't collided with a mountain would have re-written history. You don't reckon much to La Motta but he was too much for dear old Marcel.

Collins2000 wrote:

Nero3000 wrote:

Collins2000 wrote: Nero, it's actually your pompous posturing that makes me chuckle.

Ignoring the hyperbole, La Motta beat the crap out of Cerdan.

Yet, in the fantasy world you inhabit, this has no relevance.

And you wonder why I find you amusing?

Your "semi-religious" transformation comment was a beaut.

And proves that you know next to nothing about how Marcel Cerdan was regarded in his day. I've given you examples. Where's yours? Have any? Or just a load of platitudes? That's OK, those are always easy to fall back on. Much easier than having your Mommy take you by the hand to your local library and doing some actual RESEARCH.

Oh, that pesky "R" word...

Of course I'm a brit. Can't you tell that by my witty and intelligent posts?


What examples were those you gave? One boxer said he was the best fighter he ever saw? That's your 'proof'?

For fekks sake, man, there is an article at CBZ where Tunney states that Dempsey would KO Marciano in 1 round without breaking a sweat. Rocky described Ali as a heavyweight Robinson. One former Brit world champ still claims Chris Eubank was "a fraud, nothing but a fraud". Just because they have boxed doesn't mean they aren't often wrong. And, like you, they can get caught up in a fantasy.

The fact remains that La Motta beat the snot out of Cerdan.

Cerdan was a decent champ in a competitive era. Not some superman who if he hadn't collided with a mountain would have re-written history. You don't reckon much to La Motta but he was too much for dear old Marcel.

Intelligent? You say that Marcel has gone through a transformation, which is absolutely false. In fact this is what has happened with LaMotta, not Cerdan. Unless you can prove otherwise.

Yes, and Larry Holmes beat the snot out of Muhammad Ali. He was too much for dear old Muhammad. That's about the line of your logic.

My proof were the newspaper articles that I posted long ago, the quotes from contemporaries(not opponents, who have a vested interested in claiming the guys they fought would wreck any and all who came after) and the fight films. Hard to argue with that.

as far as pomposity is concerned well, you know the old saying: "You spot it, you got it".

Now do you want the LA Times article or no? Are we allergic to research?

Collins2000 wrote:

Nero3000 wrote:

Collins2000 wrote: Nero, it's actually your pompous posturing that makes me chuckle.

Ignoring the hyperbole, La Motta beat the crap out of Cerdan.

Yet, in the fantasy world you inhabit, this has no relevance.

And you wonder why I find you amusing?

Your "semi-religious" transformation comment was a beaut.

And proves that you know next to nothing about how Marcel Cerdan was regarded in his day. I've given you examples. Where's yours? Have any? Or just a load of platitudes? That's OK, those are always easy to fall back on. Much easier than having your Mommy take you by the hand to your local library and doing some actual RESEARCH.

Oh, that pesky "R" word...

Of course I'm a brit. Can't you tell that by my witty and intelligent posts?


What examples were those you gave? One boxer said he was the best fighter he ever saw? That's your 'proof'?

For fekks sake, man, there is an article at CBZ where Tunney states that Dempsey would KO Marciano in 1 round without breaking a sweat. Rocky described Ali as a heavyweight Robinson. One former Brit world champ still claims Chris Eubank was "a fraud, nothing but a fraud". Just because they have boxed doesn't mean they aren't often wrong. And, like you, they can get caught up in a fantasy.

The fact remains that La Motta beat the snot out of Cerdan.

Cerdan was a decent champ in a competitive era. Not some superman who if he hadn't collided with a mountain would have re-written history. You don't reckon much to La Motta but he was too much for dear old Marcel.

Now how about giving me some solid examples of the research you've done into this fight. Have you done any? What sources? I'm offering to send you one of mine. What about yours?

Nero3000 wrote:

Collins2000 wrote:

Nero3000 wrote: Your "semi-religious" transformation comment was a beaut.

And proves that you know next to nothing about how Marcel Cerdan was regarded in his day. I've given you examples. Where's yours? Have any? Or just a load of platitudes? That's OK, those are always easy to fall back on. Much easier than having your Mommy take you by the hand to your local library and doing some actual RESEARCH.

Oh, that pesky "R" word...

Of course I'm a brit. Can't you tell that by my witty and intelligent posts?


What examples were those you gave? One boxer said he was the best fighter he ever saw? That's your 'proof'?

For fekks sake, man, there is an article at CBZ where Tunney states that Dempsey would KO Marciano in 1 round without breaking a sweat. Rocky described Ali as a heavyweight Robinson. One former Brit world champ still claims Chris Eubank was "a fraud, nothing but a fraud". Just because they have boxed doesn't mean they aren't often wrong. And, like you, they can get caught up in a fantasy.

The fact remains that La Motta beat the snot out of Cerdan.

Cerdan was a decent champ in a competitive era. Not some superman who if he hadn't collided with a mountain would have re-written history. You don't reckon much to La Motta but he was too much for dear old Marcel.

Now how about giving me some solid examples of the research you've done into this fight. Have you done any? What sources? I'm offering to send you one of mine. What about yours?

Can you keep your answers / comments in one post instead of firing them off like a sleeping drunk who had beans for supper. It's easier for me to try and follow your convoluted logic that way. Thanks in advance.

My research? What research? I initially responded to the comment that Cerdan would beat La Motta 10 times out of 10 if they met. What sort of research do I need to do when existing empirical evidence shows that was not the case????

I'd love to see the L.A. Times report or whatever it is you have. Can you put it up at geocities or some other free hoster so we can all read it easily?

What about the fight itself? You say you have it; any chance of posting round 1 somewhere in mpeg1 or divx format? All the punters here could then view it and offer (more educated?) comments.

I'm quite willing to be converted and perhaps you have the tools to do this.

So, let's see this report and anything else you have.

Also, good to see you aren't getting all bent out of shape like some of the others in here with long-held and long-cherished opinions. I like a good debate.

Nero--If you have ever noticed any of Collins2000 previous threads from the past you would realize what a total tool he really is. He is of the ignorant brand of people who refuses to admit he is wrong, even when he has absolutely no clue about an issue, which happens a lot, or even when correct evidence has been shoved down his throat…he is still dumb about it!

It has been proven and demonstrated that whenever disagreed with all he will do is get upset, insult you, cry and then eventually leave the forum for a couple of months after being made to look like the idiot. Then, many moons later, he will return and it's like he hasn't lost a step in his ignorance...that is until he tries to whine to the owner of the site about this forum member, or that forum member thinking he can have someone banned, which in turn just gets him laughed at because he is the little boy from that story...you know the one who cried wolf one too many times and in the end, like the little boy in the story, he is just laughed at and generally ignored!

Notice how he completely dodged the issue of you asking what kind of research he has done into the LaMotta-Cerdan fight...that’s because he hasn’t done any kind of research…he hasn’t seen the fight, nor has he read any reports of the fight and it's the same way with anything else he tries to yap about! His research consists of looking at a fighters record...and that sums it up...well that and he also uses many of the records that I myself have researched over at the CBZ, and he then tries to take the quotes from certain records and attempts to use them as his own, until he was exposed for doing it, which now you will see he sometimes quotes the CBZ instead of now trying to claim the quotes as his own!

He is not allergic to research; he is just ignorant to the benefits of doing it. Trust me Nero...you are just wasting your time trying to argue with this clown...just ignore him!

barry wrote:Nero--If you have ever noticed any of Collins2000 previous threads from the past you would realize what a total tool he really is. He is of the ignorant brand of people who refuses to admit he is wrong, even when he has absolutely no clue about an issue, which happens a lot, or even when correct evidence has been shoved down his throat…he is still dumb about it!

It has been proven and demonstrated that whenever disagreed with all he will do is get upset, insult you, cry and then eventually leave the forum for a couple of months after being made to look like the idiot. Then, many moons later, he will return and it's like he hasn't lost a step in his ignorance...that is until he tries to whine to the owner of the site about this forum member, or that forum member thinking he can have someone banned, which in turn just gets him laughed at because he is the little boy from that story...you know the one who cried wolf one too many times and in the end, like the little boy in the story, he is just laughed at and generally ignored!

Notice how he completely dodged the issue of you asking what kind of research he has done into the LaMotta-Cerdan fight...that’s because he hasn’t done any kind of research…he hasn’t seen the fight, nor has he read any reports of the fight and it's the same way with anything else he tries to yap about! His research consists of looking at a fighters record...and that sums it up...well that and he also uses many of the records that I myself have researched over at the CBZ, and he then tries to take the quotes from certain records and attempts to use them as his own, until he was exposed for doing it, which now you will see he sometimes quotes the CBZ instead of now trying to claim the quotes as his own!

He is not allergic to research; he is just ignorant to the benefits of doing it. Trust me Nero...you are just wasting your time trying to argue with this clown...just ignore him!

Hi bazza, you aren't still sulking about that PM you got from Shep when you tried to get me banned are you?

Do you have anything meaningful to add to my discussion with Nero? Or are you looking to stir up more trouble?

Anyway, I'm sure Nero is quite able to handle my comments and questions without having you whining in the background.



PS Unless your next post actually has boxing content bazza, I won't be wasting my time responding.

You shouldn't have wasted your time with this one because I wasn't speaking to you! Just giving a little sound advice to someone who actually seems interested in boxing history and not someone pretending to already know it all!