Marcel Cerdan and His Historical Placement

You can disagree all you want but the ringside reports make it clear that Robinson fought a poor fight. In fact one said he was now too wealthy to be a real fighter and several others stated he had "gone back" as in he was over the hill. It was considered a slow fight and while a couple of people may have had Abrams winning just as many had Robinson winning if not more and thats even taking into consideration the point deductions which were disputed. Another report said "Robinson proved he was the best WW in the world but thats about it. He isnt a middleweight." I havent read a single account that said Abrams fought his career best fight or even a great fight. YOU might think it was Abrams best fight simply because a couple of people thought he should have won but that doesnt make it so. He lost the fight. Period. Just prior to facing Cerdan Abrams drew with the legendary 9-14 Jimmy Mandell... Never heard of him? Neither has anyone else. Abrams turned in a horrible performance in that fight. You can pretend Abrams was in his prime (his handler and biggest booster disputes you) but his record from june of 1946 to his retirement boasts a 2-4-1. His two wins coming against Belloise and Raadik neither of whom were great and both of whom avenged those defeats with KOs. His lone win of any real quality was against Belloise and that was a nip tuck affair.

Its funny, you quote that Red Smith article in the same post where you said this:

"I read the day after reports of this fight closely and there was no such thing as laMotta beating the 'carp' out of him in the first or Cerdan hanging on, just that Jake rushed Cerdan."

And yet in that same article Smith says: In spite of his injury and in spite of a severe beating in the first round - Jake clearly resolved to take command at the start, had Marcel in real trouble at the outset."

I dont think it can be understated just how hated LaMotta was by guys like Smith, Parker, and Heinz particularly after the Fox debacle (which Smith even alludes to here) and its clear that at least colored Smith's interpretation here when he admits LaMotta kicked the **** out of Cerdan before the injury happened but refuses to give LaMotta credit. Whatever. Like I said, LaMotta was just as hampered as Cerdan with a broken hand (if you think punching someone with a broken hand is easy go ahead and try it) and the fact that he was forced to maintain weight for 24 hours. The difference is he toughed it out and won. Thats what great fighters do. The bottom line is thats its pretty pathetic to pretend that Cerdan, who never fought anyone like LaMotta, was just going to win out of hand without question with a good shoulder when the guy was so protected, spent most of his career at 147, wouldnt even fight the best MWs from his own country, had already sidestepped LaMotta once a couple of years earlier, and forced LaMotta to sign a contract that not only bound him to a rematch but stipulated he wouldnt get paid for this bout until after the rematch. That sounds to me like a guy who didnt have the same faith in himself in regards to Jake as you do. Nevermind the fact that Jake was a guy who got ducked by a much better version of Tony Zale than the one Marcel beat and was forced to throw a fight and pay off the mob in order to just get to the big dance. The fallout from that made him a pariah and had more than a little to do with making Cerdan the hero against him. And Im supposed to pretend like its the protected guy who jumped over several top contenders to get an undeserved title shot against a totally shot champion was the one who didnt get the breaks? Sorry, like I said, when you have to start making as many excuses for a guy like Cerdan as people do then the fighter probably just isnt as good as the hype.

 

Whoa, whoa, don't shoot the messenger here, dude. I read that in a round by round from the UP, not from Red Smith. He had his own take on it and he was armed with a little more knowledge than the usual boys because his was a couple of days late when they had diagnosed what happened to Cerdan. The UP report actually had it dead even after 6 rounds. You can come up with all these whispers that this guy said and that guy said, but in the end. Jake beat a one-armed man, who put up one helluva fight and I think that gnaws at you. Regarding Abrams, I don't know if your trying to diss Georgie because the win looks good on Cerdan's record, but Georgie fought the greatest fighter IMO, who ever lived, who was 27 at the time, and lost a debatable decision. I will remember his loss to Robinson over any of his wins over Billy Soose.

 

Im not coming up with whispers or shooting the messenger. You are the one who keeps trying to rewrite history by pretending the fight was close. Cerdan got a major ass kicking before and after his injury. He suffered two cuts and was described by several reporters as having red welts and lumps all over his body and head. You have found one report that denigrates LaMotta (and gee I wonder why considering his popularity was at its lowest ebb at that point) while Ive posted half a dozen that talk about how one sided it was. It gnaws at me? I dont think so. I can watch Cerdan on film getting his ass handed to him and read the numerous accounts that support that and feel quite comfortable in my assessment. Im not sitting here pretending that a guy whose best wins came against past their prime fighters and total nobodies was somehow going to beat Jake LaMotta (who even Red Smith said was past his best days as well) while ignoring that LaMotta was every bit as handicapped as Cerdan yet toughed it out and won. Im also not pretending like a faded Abrams was in his prime based on a loss to a welterweight in a tepid fight that he won only three rounds on at most on his own merit. I dont need to mischaracterize that fight as a brawl or the fighter as in his prime to prop up Cerdan. The facts are already there for anyone who wants to actually go in depth and look at them rather than tow the party line that Cerdan was this great conquering hero who came over here and only lost because of a shoulder injury and plane crash. You keep acting like Red Smith had the benefit of all of this knowledge because his article came a day later. His article mentions the same cursory exam that Nardiello performed which was the same exam that the ringside accounts mention. It took place in the dressing room after the fight. His article didnt add anything to any of the others other than one more (minority) opinion, nevermind that he was a close friend of and mouthpiece for Lew Burston who was acting as Cerdan's American representative.

 

"Rewrite history" - wait a minute, I quoted the UP round-by-round account that had it dead even after 6. I'm not even giving an opinion because I didn't see the fight. There are only clips out there and I wasn't there. Evidently you were.

"He was described by several reporters as having red welts and lumps all over his body" - well of course he did, he only had one arm!

"I've posted half a dozen that talk about how one-sided it was" -you've posted nothing but inuendo. Someone was suppose to have said something and you put quotation marks around it. I love your references to "numerous accounts". My God, that could've been Joey LaMotta saying that for all we know. At least I actually posted a real article.

 

Speaking of a real article, here is the UP report on Robinson-Abrams from boxrec. As one can see by reading our accounts of this fight, someone is simply talking rhetoric to fit an agenda. I hope everyone reads this to see that the guy fighting Robinson was not some fighter on his last legs, but a fighter who put up one of the greatest displays of his career in a fantastic fight.

1947-05-16 : Sugar Ray Robinson 150¾ lbs beat Georgie Abrams 162 lbs by SD in round 10 of 10
Location: Madison Square Garden, New York, New York, USA

Referee: Eddie Joseph 6-4
Judge: Frank Forbes 6-4
Judge: Marty Monroe 4-6

Unofficial AP scorecard: 6-3-1 Abrams
Unofficial UP scorecard: 6-4 Abrams
Photo #2, Photo #3, Photo #4


"Sugar Ray Robinson, world welterweight champion, was awarded an unpopular split 10 round decision tonight over middleweight veteran Georgie Abrams after their non-title brawl at MSG. The fans indicated loudly that they thought Abrams had won the fight, particularly after Robinson had been penalized in the 7th and 8th rounds for fouling his heavier opponent with low blows. Robinson hurt Georgie with a hard right to the chin in the 2nd round and had him groggy with two following left hooks, but the game veteran fought back fiercely. The aggressive, compact Abrams staggered Robinson with hard straight rights to the head twice in the 6th round and once in the 9th. Robinson left the ring bleeding from a deep gash at the corner of his right eye and from a slight gash on his left brow. Abrams was bleeding from cuts on his right brow and lower lip." - United Press

Notes
Robinson was a 2-1 favorite.
A crowd of 15,064 produced a gate of $80,772.
Abrams faced a 30-day suspension for weighing in at 162 pounds, which was one pound over his contracted weight.
Cuts suffered by Robinson in this bout postponed his scheduled welterweight title defense against Jimmy Doyle from the original May 30 date to June 24.
"The verdict (for Robinson) was accompanied by a solid round of boos." World Boxing, February 1995, page 48.

 

Cerdan was slightly past it when he got his shot.Zale was gone.
Jack Sharkey ,viewing Cerdan in Europe, thought him a great fighter

 

My apologies!

 

I knew some old men who saw him before, during, and soon after, the war years and attested to him being a great fighter in those days.
I'd rarely, if ever, heard anyone say he wasn't a great fighter until I heard it here.

 

Actually, lots of people thought he would beat LaMotta. Hindsight is 20-20.

You talk about Cerdan's opponents being past their best. Cerdan was even more past his best than LaMotta.

It would be ridiculous to deny that the plane crash impacted on his career.

 

there is a big difference between not being great and being in the top ten mw's of all time.

 

We need more of this kind of thing. :good

 

True.
For me, Cerdan was a great fighter.
For some here he wasn't.

 

Boxrec is a wonderful tool for lazy people isnt it? If you go back and actually read my posts instead of simply hitting the reply button when you see Ive posted you would see I cited my sources. I did so because I didnt just stop at "a UPI report" on Boxrec and assume I had the whole story.

I can go on.

In regards to Georgie Abrams and Robinson Leonard Cohen writing for the New York Post stated: "Sugar Ray Robinson lost something. Call it the will to win or perhaps its the natural letdown for a fighter who is no longer money hungry. But whatever the reason the man who stood out head and shoulders above everyone in the welterweight division before he won the crown is no longer the fighter he used to be." Cohen gave Abrams only three rounds but had the fight a draw after Robinson had two rounds deducted. "Robbies foul punches made the fight closer than it otherwise would have been for the two rounds he lost would have been credited to his side of the ledger." "It was far from a good bout with too many dull spots and clinches. Abrams took all Robbie threw at him and came plodding in."

Al Buck writing for the same paper stated: "Had the decision gone against him sugar ray would have been guilty of throwing it away himself." Buck gave the decision to Robinson by five rounds to four with one even and thats even with the deductions.

Neither report made any mention of Abrams doing anything special or making a great fight. Rather both mention Robinson being below par as the reason for the fight being close. The reference to Abrams being plodding when he was once a stylist is another clue to Abrams lack of form by this point.

Jack Cuddy, who wrote your beloved UPI article goes to great lengths to describe just how bad Robinson looked in the fight calling him unimpressive, defensively careless. Cuddy stated that in rounds 2, 7, and 8 Robinson almost knocked Abrams out. The 7th and 8th were the rounds that Robinson lost but were two of his biggest rounds.

Buster Miller writing for the New York Age wrote: "We came away with the conviction that Robinson is still the best welterweight in the world. Just that and no more." "The fight was wholely unsatisfactory. It proved nothing. Neither Robinson nor Abrams showed a great deal of enthusiasm in spots and the fight hungry Garden crowd after six weeks of lions, tigers, and elephants got stuck with a turkey." Miller stated that Robinson was obviously saving his hands for his title defense against Jimmy Doyle by going to the body. "This provided the cue for his (Abrams) handlers and the ringsiders who had taken the short ends of odds at 3-1 to raise their cry of "foul." It very nearly worked. At one stage of the fight the crowd and Abrams Handlers were yelling foul before Robbie even started to swing." "Against Abrams he was only as good as he had to be."

Tommy Holmes writing for the Brooklyn Daily Eagle wrote: "SUGAR RAY WON - One of the more difficult of God's critters to understand is the boxing critic. Here Ray Robinson the welterweight champion spots rugged tricky Georgie Abrams almost a dozen pounds. He wins handily you think. But you pick up newspapers the next day and read that Sugar Ray is well on his way to being completely washed up if not in fact in a state of rigor mortis." "This Friday night party wouldnt have even been close if Robinson hadnt been penalized two rounds in which he whaled the whey out of Abrams. Penalized for meaningless low punching. The Garden customers certainly were hypnotized into the wrong slant on Robinson's body punching. Led by the anvil chorus in Abrams corner, the started sqwuaking about legal beltline wallops and progressed to the point where the yipped about punches just below Georgies wishbone. There were a few stray blows south of the equator due mainly to the fact that Georgie rose on his toes and sometimes actually left his feet to take them there." Holmes also agreed that Robinson was trying to save his hands for his upcoming title fight.

Joseph C Nichols writing for the New York Times. Had the fight 6 rounds to 4 for Robinson with the two rounds deducted. Meaning Abrams won 2 rounds on his card.


So yes, when you take a fight that Robinson won in a subpar performance and try to paint it as this great brawl that Abrams should have won because a minority of people disagreed with the OFFICIAL decision and the majority of onlookers. Then Im sorry but you are trying rewrite history. Abrams did not win. He did not turn in a career best performance. It was not this great brawl. And most importantly it doesnt change the fact that Abrams was past his best days when he fought Cerdan.

JPresser: You said Cerdan seemed a notch above most if not all of Robinsons foes at MW. Based on what? His victories over a bunch of complete european nobodies and a couple of past their prime contenders?

Unforgive: Cerdan was a slight favorite over LaMotta, largely because LaMotta had been turning in poor performances of late and was considered past his best days. In fact both the referee (who wrote an editorial on the fight a couple of days later) and that report by Red Smith that scartissue read excerpts of (lol) both mention "LaMotta in his present condition" and discuss or allude to him not being the "Lamotta of old." What does that, or the idea that Cerdan MIGHT have been more faded than LaMotta have to do with actual outcome of the fight or the speculative idea that Cerdan would have won a rematch. In the one sentence you argue he was more past his best than LaMotta and then argue that the plane crash affected his career. My point was that some want to characterize that plane crash as preventing his inevitable victory over LaMotta. In that regard I think its a silly characterization. Youre right. It did effect his career. He could have just as easily gotten over here, got his ass handed to him again with a good shoulder (and likely made another excuse as he always did when he didnt look good) and then we wouldnt be having this discussion. Speculation works both ways.