Rate these 5 guys in order of greatness?

Zarate
LaMotta
Morales
Tito
Tyson

 

Thats quite a lofty placing for Zarate M2S (who I have in the 80-90 bracket)

Explain further, you're a man who has his reasons :good

 

Aint got time to really think about it pal at work can only type fast :good

 

67. Kid Chocolate
68. Jake LaMotta
69. Ricardo Lopez
70. Manuel Ortiz
71. Carmen Basilio
72. Oscar De La Hoya
73. Mike Tyson
74. Carlos Zarate
75. Wilfred Benitez
76. Felix Trinidad
77. Erik Morales
78. Marco Antonio Barrera

 

Zarate
La Motta
Morales
Tyson
Trinidad

 

I havent seen any full fights of Zarate, only highlights so I`ll leave him out.

Morales
Tyson
Tito
Lamotta

 

Agreeing with asero...eek :scaredas:. You should check out some of his comments from older threads anarci, you would have a good laugh.

 

Nah he was way too high on that list, he struggles ot break a top 100 for me

 

Lamotta
Zarate
Tito/Morales
Tyson

 

Whilst his peak didn't last too long, in terms of all-round ability, opposition faced, and certain intangibles (how he did what he did at a fairly young age) I'd personally have Tyson above Tito and Morales, especially because the good scalps he did have where dispatched of in such a destructive way (i.e his lesser wins top Tito and Morales' IMO, and his best wins were so emphatic that even though the likes of Berbick and Thomas may not be as well regarded as say, De La Hoya and Barrera) that I'd have Tyson higher than both.

Tyson/Tito/Morales-All within 80-100 off the top of my head.

Zarate/Lamotta probably within 80-90. To be fair there are so many different aspects of the aforementioned fighters that are impressive, and also some major shortcomings in each guys resume/arsenal that they're all quite close IMO.

All bloody good fighters, all very good within their own respective styles. All of them primarily offensive level fighters which little defence (Tyson obviously was fairly hard to hit for a few years) but Zarate's wins over Zamora, Davila, Martinez, plus his 'win' over Pintor would probably put him at the top of this pile.

Lamotta obviously has some very good wins on his resume, and on film is more nuanced than he's given credit for.

Tito's best win on paper was a loss. I like how destructive he was and he actually went up in weight beating good opposition, didn't cherry pick. This goes well for him.

I loev Morales, he was a true warrior. Could be more disciplined when he wanted to but not when he always needed to IMO. Iron chin, good level of opposition, arguably robbed of a 4th weight title, though as I go for level of opposition rather than ABC Baubles, arguably beating David Diaz does not exactly lift him into the upper echelon. His 122 tenure, as well as his 126 period (including the win over Pac, which may have been more difficult without the pillows as seen in the 2nd/3rd fights) see him pretty evenly ranked with Tito IMO

As aforementioned, any order can be justfied here IMO. I feel Lamotta gets somewhat underrated due to people perceiving him as crude, and he probably has the best single win out of anyone here.

Man, I'm rambling. A tough pick, but I'll stick with the order I've put up there due to the fact I haven't got time to really dissect each mans resume.....off the top of my head they'd all be ranked within a few places between each other.

My favourite of the above is Zarate; I feel his era at Bantam gets slightly underrated on here. For me, the 2nd classiest era for 118 behind the Jofre-Harada-Rudkin-Rose-Olivares period.

 

Lamotta
Morales
Zarate
Tito
Tyson

 

Again, Tyson placed last.

Although short, surely those years place him pretty high? Plus opposition faced in losing efforts?