Fullmer isn't out-toughing Jake, and I believe that is the point some are missing. Whenever Fullmer met resistance physically, he went into this "plan B" mode that people are so found of, but I don't see as that spectacular. Jake wins when Fullmer goes plan A or plan B
Pretending Fullmer didnt get preferential treatment out west is crazy. His first fight with Webb was an outright robbery. His second fight with Webb was closer than the cards the judges turned in, his fight with Giardello was a robbery, his second fight with Basilio while he was winning handily was stopped for no reason nearly starting a riot, his third fight with Robinson was a robbery, his fourth fight with Robinson he was allowed to use his personal training ring for the fight which was four feet smaller than the contracted ring (same trick he pulled against Giardello btw) and got away with numerous fouls that went uncalled (of course this happened in their first fight in New York too and the ref answered when questioned why he allowed it “thats the only way Gene can fight”) his fight with Fernandez could have gone the other way, and his rematch with Tiger was a robbery and frankly if you want to get really technical two cards turned in for the first Fullmer-Tiger fight were way too close and despite that fight being held in San Francisco those two judges were originally from Utah. How many times does a guy get the benefit of the doubt West of the Rockies before people start questioning it.
This seems personal, and not really on the topic. So I'm curious, which parts do you disagree that he said, and do you have a retort for the points he brought up. Seems that would be much more beneficial than accusations and name calling....
I don't buy into Fulmer going into a plan B every time he met resistance. I think he was smarter than given credit for. I believe he gives LaMotta the fight of his life and takes the UD as stated B4
I think LaMotta is a bit overrated, he was losing in his priem to guys like Villemain and Dauthille and no one makes them out to be monsters.
Well I have got to get this off my chest....Fullmer is overrated.....he was not a very good fighter period, his defense was average, he didn't seem to know how to punch very well, his fundamentals were terrible, his power was average and his speed was average to slow.....but his style was effective enough but overall he was tough to watch fight.....if he was physically strong he would never have made it into the top ten had he fought in a different era or lacked the physical strength to impose his caveman skills. LaMotta was 10 times the fighter, skill wise, speed and his chin is another echelon, Fullmer does not have to power or strength to do anything here LaMotta mauls him for 15 rounds Fullmer could not avoid a fight in the trenches and not powerful enough to do anything other than club LaMotta but the body beating would cause him issues.....
So this alone means he can't beat Fullmer? You cherry pick this detail? You haven't even made a pick.
Here is Basilio on Fullmer "He was big and tough, a hard guy to fight. Of all the guys I fought, I think he was the hardest guy in the world for me to fight. He does everything wrong but it's right. He makes such unorthodox moves that you can't get a sparring partner to imitate him. He upsets your timing so badly that by the time you got un-tracked he'd be on top of you, and once he got on top of you you couldn't do anything with him because he was so strong and he could run you out of gas." "I think the two toughest fights I had were with Gene Fullmer, because I just couldn't do anything with this guy." Nothing wrong with saying Fullmer might be overrated, but saying "he was not a very good fighter period" is going a long way with a guy with such a good record. quotes from In This Corner, edited by Peter Heller
Just on overrated, you make a good case against LaMotta also. One thing is LaMotta is given credit for fighting bigger men when the opposite is more true. LaMotta fought 30 fights with men who weighed 155 or less out of his 106 fights. Fullmer fought 6 out of 64 with men who weighed 155 or less (three were Gil Turner). Lamotta's weight is really strange, as he started off as a light-heavy and then went down to middle, but was often fighting at light-heavy, even if his opposition wasn't. The widest weight gap against a good opponent is Bob Murphy (169-176). Most of the other "big" men LaMotta fought really weren't that big, as the weights show: Bob Satterfield (167-165) Jimmy Reeves (164-166) Jimmy Reeves (167-166) Nate Bolden (164-163) Lloyd Marshall was also down around 160. These are men about the same size as LaMotta. But there are a ton of fights with smaller men--Sugar Ray Robinson, Fritzie Zivic, Jackie Wilson, Tommy Bell, Tony Janiro, etc. Interestingly, Fullmer against Garth Panter (149-160) seems to be the largest weight gap either man overcame against something like a name fighter.
continuing with LaMotta, his record is speckled with rather bad and hard to explain fights: Laurent Dauthuille--defeated LaMotta 2/1949. The previous two years had seen him lose to Gustave Dagouve (2-6 record) on 2/47, lose in 1947 and 1948 to Robert Villemain, lose twice in 1948 to Cyrille Delannoit, lose in 1948 to Tiberio Mitri, and draw in 1948 with Jean Stock. Robert Villemain--was coming off a UD loss to Steve Belloise when he lost by SD to LaMotta. Lost five months later to Dave Sands. Later defeated LaMottta. Vern Lester--lost a split decision to LaMotta in 1948. Lester was 154 to LaMotta's 165. He was 23-19-12 going into this fight and 24-25-12 for his career. Cecil Hudson--defeated LaMotta in 1947. Hudson weighed 155 to LaMotta's 165. Hudson would go on to a 7-25 record for the rest of his career. Certainly plenty erratic, and nothing to indicate LaMotta was very far above the average Euros of the era. It is legitimate to point out that Fullmer beat a 35 year old Robinson, and a 32 year old Basilio. But it also fair to point out that LaMotta got his title from a 33 year old Cerdan (who was injured early in the fight) and his other big win was over a 144 lb. Robinson in a fight in which LaMotta had a 16 lb. weight pull. Still a great win, but it is at least reasonable to wonder how a prime Fullmer would have done with a welter Robinson in six tries. I think both were definitely good fighters, but either can be scored as overrated. LaMottta's best runs seem to have been during WWII when it is really difficult to buy that competition hadn't been hurt badly by the war time draft, and his postwar record is erratic. Most of his big wins were over smaller men. *just an aside on D-ck Tiger. I don't think Fullmer losing to Tiger proves much in this comparison as I think Tiger would have handled any version of LaMotta also.
