LaMotta vs Zale (prime vs prime)

The nba and the ny state athletic commission were the only ratings that mattered. Those were the ratings that dictated who got a shot and who didnt. Not Ring Magazine which had its own totally unofficial ratings that had absolutely no bearing title fights and frankly had their own biases and faults. Whether you agree with LaMottas rating is irrelevant (and frankly anyone who thinks ANY of the fighters Zale fought after WW2 deserved a shot at the title ahead of LaMotta has their head planted firmly up their ass. Why people think Nat Fleischers ratings were either official or any better than anyone elses is beyond me.

Its one thing to try to defend Zale by denigrating the official ratings but you havent exactly made any case at all for why those ratings were so bad for having LaMotta at #1 or more importantly why 17 guys deserved a fight with Zale ahead of LaMotta.

Finally, you, mcvey, keep saying you see only two yrs LaMotta was rated. How many times do we have to go over this: you are looking up the Rings annual ratings. Those do not tell the story month to month of whats going on on the ground. They just dont. Thats beside the fact that the ring ratings arent official. So youve taken already pointless data and then skewed it even further. Meaningless. Sorry if that hurts your delicate sensibilities and you dont think im playing nice but i get irritated when asshats like burt and ib pretend im not playing by the rules when i quote actual facts that just so happen to shine a not so rosey light on their hero(s).

 

K, you just cannot stop being nasty. I try to be civil with you and you call me an "asshat" though I don't wear hats...

 

I don't have anything delicate in my persona , I just don't get why you are continually gratuitously rude to every one all the time.

You've explained your point fine ,it would have been much better had you done so without the offensive references to BB & IB , but that as I said is your style.It isn't a question of
"playing nice", its a question of common politeness and its singularly lacking in your character.It's a shame ,posters would look forward to your input,[which is usually knowledgeable and informative,]if it wasn't accompanied by a tirade of sneering vituperation.As it is they just react by thinking, "oh f*ck me its that overbearing ,pompous ,condescending know all , lecturing the forum again ,"and they quickly switch off.
We are here to learn from each other ,but chiefly for our entertainment.

I remember Zale writing in the BI ,you are correct , he was self-serving in his column, bigging himself up incessantly,curiously he was described as a modest quiet man when he was an active fighter. Anyway Jake beats him imo.

 

LaMotta.