How good was Marcel Cerdan?

I haven't seen any proof of Cerdan tearing a rotator cuff though. He was prepared to fight a rematch not long after, but it was re-scheduled when LaMotta suffered a hand injury. Cerdan then died in the plane crash.

I've also read that LaMotta injured his hand against Cerdan, but kept throwing punches anyway. Cerdan once knocked out a man with a broken hand. Injuries happened often, and still do. Unless they're proven to be serious, I just have to hand credit where it's due. LaMotta beat Cerdan from pillar to post in the very first round, and kept taking the fight to him all the way. He just looked like the bigger and stronger man in there, and he didn't have to go looking for Cerdan.

News archives aren't working for me at the moment, so I can't post any online reports. LaMotta-Williams was another close fight, but the decision was unanimous. Holman seemed to run everyone close, but the judges went against his conservative style a lot of the time. LaMotta just kept working and pressuring, and got the benefit of the doubt in several close decisions, although he was also the victim of robbery a few times.

 

YesB..I saw that fight between Marcel Cerdan and tough Georgie Abrams at MSG ,1946...Remember the fight well. Cerdan was on the attack every moment and Georgie Abramns who DREW with Charley Burley, and lost a
controversial dec to a prime Ray Robinson in 1947, was counterpunching.
I thought Marcel Cerdan deserved the decision, due to his Armstrong like
aggressiveness..The crowd seemed content with the decision ,because
Marcel forced the fight..I would say 6-4 or 7-3 Cerdan...Marcel was 30 at the time,probably past his wartime prime....

 

how good was abrams, BB ?? he's a fighter i've always liked reading about.what other fighters could you compare him with, style wise ??

 

Abrams was a spoiler but I doubt he deserved the decisions over Robinson, Cerdan, even Burley.

Past prime Abrams vs Apostoli for those who are interested:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxk5RpDZAy0[/ame]


You can see he was a crafty fellow, and surely a very difficult man to fight and look good against.

 

cheers great a, he looked like a handful to me

 

Georgie Freedom Abrams was a sly. boxer ,crafty and game, who had quite a record..Look at the toughies he defeated---
Teddy Yarosz
Lou Brouillard
BillybSoose
Cocoa Kid
Jimmy Leto [licked Charley Burley]
Steve Belloise
Anton Raadik [ dropped Marcel Cerdan a couple of times ]
Abrams drew with Charley Burley in 1940
Gave a prime Ray Robinson fits in a disputed decision in 1947
Dropped Tony Zale in 1st rd in 1941 [before Zale went in to the Army]
In short ,Georgie Abrams would have been a champion in other times..

 

cheers BB.his fight record is littered with tough guys.
didn't abrams like zale, join the us navy during the war.

 

wow, what a good fight!! very competative all the way.:good

 

I have next day reports from Chicago papers re: Cerdan-Raadik and Detroit papers for LaMotta-Cerdan.

The judges had Marcel winning every round vs Raadik except for the last one. Being that this was Raadik's hometown that should tell you the extent of Marcel's dominance. But from what I've gathered Marcel was sick in between rounds(throwing up) and was uncharacteristically tired from the mid-rounds on(remember, this was a fighter with remarkable stamina). The knockdowns were unimpressive according to reports(he arose quickly each time), the first punch being nothing especially powerful and Cerdan going down due to exhaustion more than anything else. The next two were more punch-shoves. Despite rumors to the contrary, the crowd booed Cerdan's poor last round performance after the decision was announced, not the decision itself. Sick, exhausted and knocked down three times, he hardly looked like a winner when the ref raised his arm

If Raadik had been ripped-off in his own hometown there would have been a big stink in the papers the following day. There was none.

Cerdan-LaMotta: Disregard NY newspaper reports- which are ridiculously LaMotta-biased- and go to the source on this one. Jake hurt his knuckle mid-fight but was still able to jab with the arm effectively and occasionally hook. Cerdan's left- his best punch- was completely useless after a couple rounds. Yet he still hung in there and battled with Jake. No doubt a two-armed Cerdan would have made a bit more of an interesting fight out of it.

I think he wins a rematch. Jake tore out and really did well in that first round, but I think too much is made of this as being an indicator of how their fight would have gone, injury or no. Remember Joe Walcott vs Marciano. It could be said that JW had a MORE dominant first round than LaMotta did vs Cerdan, flooring Rocky, bloodying his mouth, muscling him and even tossing him around like a ragdoll at times. But ultimately this was not the story of their fight. So I don't think you can fairly assess Cerdan-LaMotta by that first round. Don't forget that Cerdan won the next round (and according to the round-by-round even dazed him a bit).

A rematch would have been a classic.

 

But a strong LaMotta would have been tough for any middleweight, don't you think?

 

Oh, I just wait for SuzieQ to arrive in that thread. He has a very strong opinion on LaMotta-Cerdan and argued it well in the past.

 

Gents,
I'm pretty new here, I used to frequent the BBC board a few years ago (hence beeb in my username) - (anybody know Dadgad from there ? Great poster). Was on Boxing Banter for a while too.

I gotta say what a great thread this is. I'm in my mid (actually late!) 40s, so too young to remember the 1940s themselves. I was introduced to boxing with the death of Marciano and my love of boxing grew from there.

Where I'm going with this is I always felt (pre-internet) there was a mystery surrounding the Cerdan-LaMotts fight...I felt that I could never get to the bottom of what really happened, who would have won wothout Cerdan's injury, who would have won the rematch etc. As I got older & more cynical (!) the cynic in me put the lack of coverage down to pro La Motta hometown media bias (that is not meant to offend any Americans on this board).

Well this thread has filled a lot of gaps...and gone some way to answering a long-standing mystery for me...very educational...thanks guys

 

Strong opinions are fine. Just as long as one refers to the unbiased, next-day reports on this one. If the NY media is used as the primary source then it gets a bit twisted in the New Yorker's favor (read Klompton's points on the Greb vs Tunney thread)

 

You're right. There were pieces missing and that's why I went and found the primary sources myself. I think the responsibility lay with the New York media, which in the past has shown a tendency to twist things in their boy's favor, whether it be in baseball, boxing, football or whatever. Just the nature of the beast I suppose

I have several different Detroit newspaper reports on this bout. Happy to share the info any time :good

 

I know about the Raadik fight, Raadik was no doubt losing clearly but Cerdan did look very vulnerable late. In a longer fight he would have been stopped. I do excuse him for it as his performance was not up to his usual standard. Still, it's a fight you don't often hear about even though Cerdan was running rapidly out of steam.

I'm not really going by reports but what I've seen. LaMotta took it to him and Cerdan had apparent difficulties dealing with his strength. Even with two useful hands, LaMotta was getting the better of the action early. In the late rounds Cerdan was just staying in there with sheer heart.

Cerdan could have won the rematch, although it should be taken into account that he was no youngster at the time and a recovery from a tough loss wouldn't have been easy. On the other hand, LaMotta's life went in the gutter after the Cerdan win, and it became increasingly difficult for him to shed the weight. In my opinion, a peak conditioned LaMotta beats Cerdan, even with two hands. Both would brawl it out, but LaMotta was the bigger and stronger man. LaMotta to me was at his best in the mid 40's.

No doubt, but some think LaMotta was supposed to be easy pickings for him and only lost because of a shoulder injury. It's not quite that simple.