1949 LaMotta vs 1985 Hagler

I see, shall we compare their skills and attributes and see who comes out ahead?

 

Prime LaMotta beats prime Hagler. Just a greater fighter. Most old timers and sports writers and Jimmy Jacobs thought so too. Revisionist historians love to undersell Jake.

 

I don't know who would win but one thing is sure... Who says that "hagler is levels on lamotta and it would not be a close fight and hagler would beat his crap "etc... All that know is that this people have absolutely no clue about boxing history

 

Hagler under performed a few times in his championship career .. he seemed to have a bit of doubt about his own stamina going 15 .. he did it against Vito the first time, he almost punched himself out the first time against Obel and he did it against against Duran .. none of those fighters hurt him. Hagler's chin was as terrific as LaMotta's .. somewhere deep inside Marvin had big doubts and Ray Leonard took complete advantage of exploiting it ..

Jake's problem was that he was really a 168 pounder who had to starve himself to get to 160 and it really took a toll on him over time ..

When Hagler went balls to the wall as he did against Minter, Vito in the rematch, Hearns and Hamsho in the rematch I think he was better than Jake .. style wise it is a war .. Jake was skilled, cute , had defense and was a swarmer .. I'll say this, Jake sure can beat the Marvin of Duran or Vito 1.

 

welcome back mate!!

 

This is a close fight here given the years of the OP .. I find it laughable that some say Hagler is levels above Jake and bombs him out, a real old school tough guy who goes 5 fights with the best p4p of all time. I agree that Jake is a bit past it here, but so is Hagler maybe a bit too.. It's a 50/50 fight for me.. Prime vs Prime, 15 rds .. Jake UD

 

Well here we go again we are talking two great middleweights Hagler had the better all around skills and discipline to stay in shape and fight 15 rds at middleweight....as good as LaMotta was and I have a great appreciation for his subtle skills and toughness he was a force of nature but he lacked discipline to stay at his best weight at 160 he fluctuated because he didn't like the fitness side but loved the fighting he was a talented tough guy. People forget that the LaMotta that beat SRR was a bigger stronger guy fighting a welterweight and only winning 1/6 with his natural advantages tells me SRR was always a bad style match up for LaMotta and SRR's people by letting him fight a big middleweight that many times tells me they were not worried about LaMotta even with the size difference.

Hagler was better all the way around and consistent and in 85 he beat Hearns in the greatest 3 rds in middleweight title history.....if we are talking about the 85 Hagler we are talking about the guy who was motivated to walk through a motivated Hearns bombs and win at all costs and its this guy I think beats LaMotta in a war by decision....no KO's two iron chins and LaMotta's brittle hands ensures it is a war of attrition and if anything he breaks his hands on Hagler's hard head but he certainly doesn't hurt him....what does LaMotta have that Briscoe, Roldan, Hamsho, Sibson etc...doesn't have besides the greatest middleweight chin but certainly not power.

 

THX. I try