BoxRec

As for LaMotta-Cerdan: Ive interviewed several people who were at that fight and they all agreed that LaMotta was kicking Cerdans ass royally before the "injury". Personally I call Cerdans injury into question because from the film of the fight you can see that after the slip/push/knockdown he is throwing punches with his supposedly injured arm/shoulder. One of the men I interviewed was a correspondent for Ring Magazine seated in a neutral corner ringside and he stated that "Im not saying Cerdan was faking his injury but even with two good hands he wasnt beating LaMotta that night. LaMotta was just better, period.

klomptom wrote this and the AP report showed lamotta had a hurt hand. I could dig up other reports that lamotta had a hurt hand if u dont believe me?



I could say ur sources are just as bias as mine. If u really think cerdan would whup lamotta, make a separate thread

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:heres my unofficial top 15 middles


1. Harry Greb
2. Marvin Hagler
3. Carlos Monzon
4. Sugar Ray Robinson
5. Charley Burley
6. Stanley Ketchel
7. Mickey Walker
8. Holman Williams
9. Jake La Motta
10. Bernard Hopkins
11. Marcel Cerdan
12. Emile Griffith
13. Rodrigo Valdes
14. Lloyd Marshall
15. Tiger Flowers

This is actually a pretty good list. I would however, suggest that you look into the careers of Nonpareil Jack Dempsey(THE p4p fighter of his era), Kid McCoy and Tommy Ryan.

Nero3000 wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:nero u dont seem to think much of lamotta do u? where do u rate him

Not in my top 10. Anyone who puts him in their top 10 is, in my opinion, either not doing their homework or is more charitable than Mother Theresa.

I like Jake. He was a blue-collar warrior of the first order. For many years he was underrated, but ever since "Raging Bull" came out he has been vastly overrated.

well let me ask u, who did marcel ever beat to get in the top 10???


a washed up old overated tony zale?



marcel looks great on film and dominated his opposition. thats why i rate him high






lamotta beat far greater competiton than marcel

the IBRO boxing panel rated lamotta 9th greatest middle. so they thought he was top 10 material

[qu

klomptom wrote this and the AP report showed lamotta had a hurt hand. I could dig up other reports that lamotta had a hurt hand if u dont believe me?

I've already conceded this fact to you. And I give you props for bringing it to the forefront. But I also concede that this injury more than likely occurred late in the fight as Jake was hooking hard all the way through. His hand never became a factor. Again, I HAVE SEEN THE FILMS. So have others here and they back me on this last fact. Have YOU seen them? Apparently not or you wouldn't be saying what you are saying.

I could say ur sources are just as bias as mine.

How so? Was the LA Times run by French Moroccans at the time? Or perhaps the sources cited by DNA were? Again, this is post-WW II America. Why would American papers make excuses for non-American fighters over American fighters?

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

Nero3000 wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:nero u dont seem to think much of lamotta do u? where do u rate him

Not in my top 10. Anyone who puts him in their top 10 is, in my opinion, either not doing their homework or is more charitable than Mother Theresa.

I like Jake. He was a blue-collar warrior of the first order. For many years he was underrated, but ever since "Raging Bull" came out he has been vastly overrated.

well let me ask u, who did marcel ever beat to get in the top 10???

Holman Williams, Harold Green, Lavern Roach, Anton Raadik, Georgie Abrams....ALL ranked fighters.


a washed up old overated tony zale?

No, that's who he beat to win the title.

Holman Williams, Harold Green, Lavern Roach, Anton Raadik, Georgie Abrams....ALL ranked fighters.

williams was past his prime




like i said, lamotta clearly beat much better opposition

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

Holman Williams, Harold Green, Lavern Roach, Anton Raadik, Georgie Abrams....ALL ranked fighters.

williams was past his prime




like i said, lamotta clearly beat much better opposition

Past prime, but still rated highly. Your question was "Who'd he beat to get into the top 10?" not "who was in their prime?"

i mean top 10 all time . u said lamotta isnt top 10 all time, then why is cerdan?




- i agree williams was still a very good fighter when cerdan beat him. its a good win

Williams, Roach and Green weren't. Marcel Cerdan looks awesome on tape, but he didn't beat very good opposition.

Actually, reading this thread, I'm starting to rethink my opinion of Cerdan. I think I have him too high at #9.[/quote]

*sigh* This debate is starting to go in endless circles. All evidence ignored. I have seen very little "thinking", only spouting of myths and platitudes. You go ahead and uh, "rethink" your position on Cerdan my friend. Age quod agis.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:the IBRO boxing panel rated lamotta 9th greatest middle. so they thought he was top 10 material

IBRO also rate Walker and Ketchel over Monzon.

They are extremely biased.

DoubleM wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:the IBRO boxing panel rated lamotta 9th greatest middle. so they thought he was top 10 material

IBRO also rate Walker and Ketchel over Monzon.

They are extremely biased.

Has anyone got a link so I can have a look at the IBRO ratings?

dr_devious wrote:

DoubleM wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:the IBRO boxing panel rated lamotta 9th greatest middle. so they thought he was top 10 material

IBRO also rate Walker and Ketchel over Monzon.

They are extremely biased.

Has anyone got a link so I can have a look at the IBRO ratings?

Here ya go:

http://www.ibroresearch.com/All%20Time%20Rankings.htm

to me the best evidence is to look at the film.forget someone else's opinion as to what they think in a newspaper and judge for yourself.look at the fights as i have and then tell me cerdan was the same fighter,it just cannot be done.cerdan 1 handed v lamotta 2 handed its very clear to see.cerdan 2 handed against zale is beautiful to watch.
as for jake was too strong,how is throwing your opponent on the floor boxing?hulk hogan could have challenged tyson by this reckoning and dropped him on the floor dislocating his shoulder.heck he could have done it a second time and popped the other.tyson retires and hogan is champ.bb says hogan battered tyson and his strength was too much.

dalek wrote:to me the best evidence is to look at the film.forget someone else's opinion as to what they think in a newspaper and judge for yourself.look at the fights as i have and then tell me cerdan was the same fighter,it just cannot be done.cerdan 1 handed v lamotta 2 handed its very clear to see.cerdan 2 handed against zale is beautiful to watch.
as for jake was too strong,how is throwing your opponent on the floor boxing?hulk hogan could have challenged tyson by this reckoning and dropped him on the floor dislocating his shoulder.heck he could have done it a second time and popped the other.tyson retires and hogan is champ.bb says hogan battered tyson and his strength was too much.

You're just gonna exhaust yourself my friend. These gents are determined to hang on for dear life to the frayed threads of the LaMotta myth. They won't address your points, they will just keep repeating the same debunked arguments using the same discredited sources.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:heres my unofficial top 15 middles
1. Harry Greb
2. Marvin Hagler
3. Carlos Monzon
4. Sugar Ray Robinson
5. Charley Burley
6. Stanley Ketchel
7. Mickey Walker
8. Holman Williams
9. Jake La Motta
10. Bernard Hopkins
11. Marcel Cerdan
12. Emile Griffith
13. Rodrigo Valdes
14. Lloyd Marshall
15. Tiger Flowers

Solid list, only major grievance I have is Tiger Flowers so low at 15. I think he's at least top 10, albeit in the bottom half, considering he held his own with Greb and was robbed against Walker. I'd put him at 8th looking at your list.

"I saw a Frenchman in Casablanca who is the greatest fighter I have ever seen. His name is Marcel Cerdan."
- Ezzard Charles circa early 40s

Nat Fleischer was 'sighting' him as early as 1938 and later when Cerdan became better known and was being quote as the next champ and coming to America (circa mid 40's), he (Nat) 'reminded' Ring readers of this fact!

jimglen wrote:Nat Fleischer was 'sighting' him as early as 1938 and later when Cerdan became better known and was being quote as the next champ and coming to America (circa mid 40's), he (Nat) 'reminded' Ring readers of this fact!

True. Actually, when he came to America he was considered by most experts across the ocean as being past his peak. Heck, when he fought LaMotta he was about 5 years older than Jake and had more fights under his belt(that is why I found it funny that Klompton stated that most felt that it was LaMotta and nor Cerdan who was past his peak!

Still, Marcel came with a truckload of hype which must have put extra pressure on him. Expectations were perhaps a bit too high and Americans reacted badly when he didn't quickly KO Georgie Abrams and Anton Raadik, forgetting that those two(especially Abrams) were among the best and toughest in the division. Somehow because they were standing at the end of the fight it was believed that they should have been "given" the decision. If they'd deserved the decisions they would have gotten them! How else can you explain Marcel getting the decision in the backyards of those two(Abrams-NY, Raadik- his adopted home of Chicago)??

More info that Cerdan detractors here will happily ignore.....

"Marcel Cerdan would have beaten Sugar Ray Robinson. I think he was the only middleweight in history who would have when Ray was at his peak. Robinson always had trouble with strong middleweights who pressured him. The difference between Cerdan and those guys is that Marcel had power. Guys like LaMotta, Fullmer and Basilio didn't. Plus his defense was much better than those guys. I don't think Ray could have handled him."
- IKE WILLIAMS

"The night Marcel Cerdan took on Jake LaMotta he fought the greatest fight I have ever seen, with ONE HAND! Marcel Cerdan would have beaten Ray Robinson. He had the style, the skill and the flexibility, as well as the temperament. In the ring he was swift, graceful and deadly. He was courage unlimited and could take a punch better than most. His jab was like a rapier, and he never wasted a punch. Every punch hit the target and he drove them in short. Cerdan the artist would have caught up with the lanky boxing master Robinson. It would have been a spectacular fight for as long as it lasted. But Cerdan would have beaten him. Maybe even KO'd him."
- MURRAY GOODMAN(former publicity director of boxing for Madison Square Garden)

whoops. Didn't realize the italics were still on.

DoubleM wrote:Purely head-to-head:

1. Marvelous Marvin (his actual name)
2. Carlos Monzon
3. Ray Robinson
4. Bernard Hopkins
5. Charley Burley
6. Emile Griffith
7. Holman Williams
8. Dick Tiger
9. Rodrigo Valdez
10. Thomas Hearns
11. Ezzard Charles
12. Roy Jones Jr
13. Marcel Cerdan
14. Jake LaMotta
15. Mickey Walker

Something like that.

dick tiger at 8? then wheres joey giardello? a past his prime gairdello beat tiger and was robbed in the rematch. I would take a prime fullmer even money vs tiger.

please explain to me why tiger gets to be rated over gene fullmer and joey giardello, let alone a mickey walker or jake la motta?


Mickey Walker would have destroyed a emile griffith, tommy hearns, dick tiger. hes far too low. he should be top 5. have u ever seen walkero n film? he looks great



emile griffith at 6?

griffith lost 2 out of 3 to Nino benvenuti




tommy hearns in the top 10? tommy hearns was knocked out by the ordinary iran barkley. who did hearns ever beat at middle? i wouldnt put hearns in my rop 20. his best weight was welter and junior middle, not middle.



u have defintley shown plenty of bias in this head to head rankings in favor of monzon and haglers competition

Brockton, One thing about puttin Giardello on the list is then ya gotta look at George Benton cuz he beat Joey in 10 before Giardello won the title and then Giardello wanted nothing to do with him. Ducked him.Of course then you have to look at Bad Bennie cuz he thrashed Benton a little later on.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

DoubleM wrote:Purely head-to-head:

1. Marvelous Marvin (his actual name)
2. Carlos Monzon
3. Ray Robinson
4. Bernard Hopkins
5. Charley Burley
6. Emile Griffith
7. Holman Williams
8. Dick Tiger
9. Rodrigo Valdez
10. Thomas Hearns
11. Ezzard Charles
12. Roy Jones Jr
13. Marcel Cerdan
14. Jake LaMotta
15. Mickey Walker

Something like that.

dick tiger at 8? then wheres joey giardello? a past his prime gairdello beat tiger and was robbed in the rematch. I would take a prime fullmer even money vs tiger.

please explain to me why tiger gets to be rated over gene fullmer and joey giardello, let alone a mickey walker or jake la motta?


Mickey Walker would have destroyed a emile griffith, tommy hearns, dick tiger. hes far too low. he should be top 5. have u ever seen walkero n film? he looks great



emile griffith at 6?

griffith lost 2 out of 3 to Nino benvenuti




tommy hearns in the top 10? tommy hearns was knocked out by the ordinary iran barkley. who did hearns ever beat at middle? i wouldnt put hearns in my rop 20. his best weight was welter and junior middle, not middle.



u have defintley shown plenty of bias in this head to head rankings in favor of monzon and haglers competition

Listen. I see what I see. I see Fullmer lumbering around on film, then I see Valdez slugging with skill, and I rate Valdez higher. I have no shown bias. Have I shown bias against Bob Fitzimmons for not having him there? You know as well as I do that his style would not cope with modern fighters.

Show me your head-to-head list.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

DoubleM wrote:Purely head-to-head:

1. Marvelous Marvin (his actual name)
2. Carlos Monzon
3. Ray Robinson
4. Bernard Hopkins
5. Charley Burley
6. Emile Griffith
7. Holman Williams
8. Dick Tiger
9. Rodrigo Valdez
10. Thomas Hearns
11. Ezzard Charles
12. Roy Jones Jr
13. Marcel Cerdan
14. Jake LaMotta
15. Mickey Walker

Something like that.

dick tiger at 8? then wheres joey giardello? a past his prime gairdello beat tiger and was robbed in the rematch. I would take a prime fullmer even money vs tiger.

please explain to me why tiger gets to be rated over gene fullmer and joey giardello, let alone a mickey walker or jake la motta?


Mickey Walker would have destroyed a emile griffith, tommy hearns, dick tiger. hes far too low. he should be top 5. have u ever seen walkero n film? he looks great



emile griffith at 6?

griffith lost 2 out of 3 to Nino benvenuti




tommy hearns in the top 10? tommy hearns was knocked out by the ordinary iran barkley. who did hearns ever beat at middle? i wouldnt put hearns in my rop 20. his best weight was welter and junior middle, not middle.



u have defintley shown plenty of bias in this head to head rankings in favor of monzon and haglers competition

BB

Fullmer was a rugged hard fighter but there's no way he's a top 15 MW. I think Tiger is a much better fighter.

Also no way does Walker destroy Griffith. I'd say that's an even fight. Walker is a true great but so is Emile.