Carl Froch vs Jake Lamotta at 168

Advantages to Both men.

Both very tough but jake is probably tougher.
Both very fit but jakes stamina was relentless.
Both packed a decent punch but carl has the more Ko Power.
Both have average speed and are probably even in this department.
Physical advantages go to Carl Froch with about 4inches height and a huge 9inch reach advantage.
Both defences were supsetible to quick boxers with straight shots, lamotta probably rolled and slipped in better, and would need to roll in against froch's superior jab.

So who wins and how i only made this thread as Jake lamotta was a big hefty muscular middleweight and i bet he weighed in about 165-170 at fight night.

 

Same day weigh ins, I don't think Lamotta was 170 fight night, also he seemed to have a good amount of physical strength to rough up opponents as opposed to punching power. Also Jake gives up an 8 inch reach advantage as well as 5 inches of height. That along with weight differential gives Carl a huge edge, and Jake just wasn't polished or technical enough to overcome the adversity that Froch would become. And he also doesn't have explosive one punch KO power to equalize.

 

Froch would be a L-HW cum HW in Jakes time, and Jake would be a Jr MW cum MW in Carl's time, an unlikely match!

 

The only question is whether Froch could stop him within the distance.

 

Froch would be fighting Rocky Marciano in those days.

 

And how much would marciano weigh nowadays.

 

Not that much more honestly looking at his frame.

 

LaMotta knocked out Bob Satterfield who would have knocked Froch's dick in the dirt.

 

Doubtful. Satterfield had a china chin and terrible stamina. Froch would have KO'd him.

 

:deal Half of bob's losses were by KO or TKO.

 

Too many guys beat Satterfield though.

 

an early Satterfield too, all these facts count for something, unless of course you try to blind swipe that by people... Jake too was pushed and stretched in his peak years by Welters cum Middles, smaller men. pertinent facts also.

as I said in my original post, "in each others time, they never would have met."

 

I really like Froch, but against Lamotta? He gets KO'd in the 3rd round. Froch fold and taste canvas like a little *****.... Modern day Euro-fighter. Definitely not ol'school skills or mindset.

 

Froch knocking out Satterfield. LOL. Froch beating LaMotta at any weight is ****ing laughable. I realize hes popular across the pond but hes certainly nothing special.

 

Laughable? really? atsch

For the record, I think Froch's superior reacha nd height wpuld play a hug factor as both are even in many other departments (strength, resilience, power, speed etc.) with La Motta having the slightly tougher chin. If Froch can establish the jab, he wins.

If La Motta is on a good night and is hell bent on winning, slipping and sliding, relentlessly trying to find his way in (think the first Robinson fight), it's a tough night for Carl i.e. the Glen Johnson fight X10