Middleweight Tournament Round 2: Hopkins vs LaMotta

A balanced post as last. :good

WhatARock; I agree.

160lb Hatton atsch

 

I don't see how he blatantly ducked Burley. How can you accuse him of ducking Archie Moore and Ezzard Charles who were light heavyweights by the time LaMotta became a contender?

 

I have had a harder time making a pick here than in any other thread of the tournament's.

 

Because he'll chuck anything in to try and further his (usually unfounded) opinion.

And he's also thick as.

 

You think I'm underselling Hatton :huh Seriously I mainly put that in to **** people off. But other than chin Lamotta doesnt really do much better in a P4P sense. Hatton isn't a bad fighter himself, but in all honesty Lamotta doesnt bring much more to the table as a skillset and both are similar fighters, high pressure, loads of punches, fastish hands, very strong at the weight

I'm sure Hatton would beat Mayweather too because of the 'intense pressure'

 

not some of the more seasoned vets around here who really know the game ... you aint cringeing over a guy who takes wins over trinidad and delahoya ..over a win over prime time ray robinson? ... why don't you go watch a fight that happened prior to 1990

 

LMMFAO he just called jake ****in lamotta a 160 pound ricky hatton!!!! arguement over ...

 

What kind of argument is this? Alright, LaMotta did beat one of the greatest fighters of all time, but he was naturally bigger - he was also beaten by once previously by the same man, and then another four times after that. 5-1 to a greater yet admittedly smaller fighter; hardly blow-Hopkins-out-of-the-water material is it?

Truth is, if Hopkins were around in the 1940s and never got a shot at the title, but one of his fights existed on tape showing him to be as good as he was in the '90s, all of us here at the classic section would lap it right up and go nuts over him. He'd surpass the almost mythical Charley Burley.

 

Perhaps the fact he said 'why do I need Burley when I can fight an old past prime Zivic who had just lost to Burley instead', Moore was beating Marshall in '45 weighing 162 who'd just beat Lamotta, why not face 1 of the 2 after?

 

and i didn't say he would blow hopkins out of the water i even said the fight would be a close one .. but lamotta edges it in my book .. this power puncher cat is the guy whose making it look like a lunch break for hopkins ... who in his own right lost to the greatest fighter he fought .. and never beat him useing money as an excuse never to fight him again ..

 

No ones said that, but if you can find it feel free to quote it and stop making things up

 

I think Hopkins takes this.

Contrary to what many have said, I don't think this is a bad stylistic match-up for Hopkins and tend to think that LaMotta is slightly overrated due to the film and being historically linked with SRR.

I've always thought Hopkins dealt pretty well with what I would call "bullish" fighters like LaMotta, and though I'm sure LaMotta would have his moments...I see Hops cruising (yes I said cruising) to a clear UD 11-4 or 10-2.

 

no you just called him a ricky hatton and that just tells me your a nobody with flawd boxing knowlage

 

When a horse looks a gift person in the mouth, you know he's right when he then turns around and kicks him in the head.

 

Fair answer but the bottom line is Lamotta picked up many losses to far lesser fighters than Hopkins and mainly fought smaller men. I think Lamotta is very good, but I don't consider him a great and dont think he could beat greats at MW. In fairness most know this no one would pick him over Hagler, Greb, Monzon, Jones, MW Robinson, Tiger etc.