I recently started a thread asking which fighter had the least luck in a series of fights against the same opponent. In a one-off fight and the circumstances that surrounded it, Cerdan was very unlucky against LaMotta. Cerdan had to fight one-handed after the first round because of a shoulder injury he sustained when LaMotta threw him to the canvas. The injury caused Cerdan to quit after the ninth round, losing the World Middleweight title as a result. The rematch was then rescheduled because LaMotta injured his shoulder six days before the fight. Cerdan was killed flying out for the rescheduled rematch... That's pretty unlucky. Anyway... Who do you think would have won the rematch, barring injured shoulders? I'm going with Cerdan.
Lamotta. Whats lost in the hype about Cerdans shoulder excuse is that he used that excuse (among others) in other fights before when he looked bad, he was getting his ass kicked royally before the injury, and LaMotta likewise injured his hand in the fight. The difference? LaMotta toughed it out and prevailed. He was by far the more proven fighter and so I go with him.
From what I've seen it looks like LaMotta was really going for it in the first round and Cerdan was riding it out. Cerdan was fighting one handed and couldn't even jab LaMotta to keep him at bay. Also I wouldn't say LaMotta was the more proven fighter. I've never seen footage of LaMotta fighting as impressively as Cerdan did against Zale. I'm going with a comfortable points victory for Cerdan in the rematch.
The fight would be a barnburner IMO Cerdan threw a lot of left jabs and hooks with Zale not like his fight with LaMotta where he threw almost none
CERDAN clear victory, as the 1st would have been absent of not only a documented injury, but also clearly visible one.
Zale was completely shot when he fought Cerdan. Hed been ducking LaMotta for years so Cerdan looking good against a guy whose feet looked like lead, had no energy or punch resistence, and who couldnt get off doesnt impress me. Cerdan fought 95 or more percent of his fights against weak European competition. He didnt even face the best French middleweights, so to say he was as proven or more proven than LaMotta at any level is simply inaccurate. Compare their list of fights against world class opposition and LaMottas makes Cerdans look anemic at best. In the first round LaMotta hammered Cerdan all over the ring and Cerdan still had two good hands. Go read the first hand accounts. Allan Rosenfeld who was ringside told me Jake was lifting Cerdan off the canvas with bodyshots. He wasnt sure Cerdan was even injured and said regardless he wasnt beating LaMotta. Like I said, Cerdan wasnt averse to using an excuse when lost or looked bad. LaMotta simply won inspite of his injury and didnt need to make excuses. Keep in mind that the only reason Cerdan even took that fight was because LaMotta had to pay him an extra $50,000 on top of his purse. He sure wasnt running toward that showdown.
Cerdan. Better skills, just as good as a chin, and better power. Better defense too. It would be a good fight thanks to LaMotta's style.
Perhaps but Graziano was good enough to earn a shot at the title and Zale was still good enough to win it back and a washed up fighter doesn't win a world title as emphatically as Zale did.
