1. Two of the "most" are James Dawson and Arthur Daley. Jesse Abramson also questioned the honesty of this bout. Interestingly, the three articles given to read all say that "most" ringsiders thought the fight was faked. 2. Whether Al Silvani heard anything about the fix, Daley makes plain that many did and Eddie Eagan, the Chairman of the NYSAC, actually went to LaMotta's dressing room before the fight to warn him about it. 3. I think the Senate committe led to the breakup of the IBC and Truman Gibson, at least, served some time. I don't know about Carbo and Palermo, but I think the statute of limitations had run out on fixed boxing matches in the 1940's. As long as they refused to answer questions, and therefore shielded themselves from a perjury charge, I don't think they could be convicted of anything, but they were finished within boxing. 4. I am certain LaMotta went over the top, or his ghostwriter did, in his memoirs, but this is neither here nor there as to whether he threw this fight. 5. Unless this doctor represented an independent body such as the NYSAC, I would question his testimony. Every time a celebrity OD's, there is his "personal" physician on TV swearing the deceased never abused drugs. Some doctors say whatever they are paid to say.
1) There were enough rumors about fixes in those times, and like I said, the Graziano scandal was still being talked about for everyone to be over-suspicious about things. The Ring writer mentions the same kind of rumors were spread before the Lesnevich fight too. It's not that unusual for late betting to shift the odds, especially when one fighter is from another city, his supporters usually arrive on the day of the fight. And like I already pointed out, I highly doubt the the mob gave away the info about a fix before the fight, and with Fox it actually happened twice in a row according to the Ring. That'd be just stupid for the mob to have done. 2) Whatever breakup there was, LaMotta's testimony about supposed fix couldn't affect it in any way. It was used mostly to swing the opinion of the senate toward harsher consequences in general about the mob controlling boxing, than to look into that particular fight. I'm pretty sure nobody even cared to know the truth about that fight anymore. 3) LaMotta never had good reputation in the first place, even without that ridiculous exaggeration in his description of the fight. I'll take anything he says with a big pinch of salt, especially when he changes his mind some 13-14 years too late, and especially when he can't abstain from distorting the truth so much in his description. 4) There was a lot more reason to doubt LaMotta's late change of mind than there was to doubt the doctor's testimony.
Yeah, you tell me that Murphy and Nardico fights were fixes too. How many other fighters withstood Satterfield's punching power? Way too many to list them all here.
The Murphy and Nardico fights weren`t fixes obviously, but it was obvious that LaMotta was past his prime by the time both fights took place, although I am sure you will disagree. And do you really believe that the fighters who went the distance with Bob fought it out in the trenches with him and went toe to toe? Because if you do, I`ve got a nice bridge I wanna sell you at a bargain...
check out bob satterfield on youtube senya if you dont believe his power. watch him knock out 6'2 220lb # 2 ranked bob baker in 1 round.
I have Satterfield-Baker in good quality myself, without any youtubes. From local Chicago Tribune report on the fight: Satterfield, striving for his 14th knockout in 17 starts, failed to capitalize on his best chance, in the fourth round when he landed a terrific right to the jaw which shook Jake to the heels. Bob neglected to follow up his advantage and Jake soon took the play away from him. ... Satterfield's backers were given renewer hope in the seventh when a left to the armpit staggered Jake. But that was Bob's last telling effort, ...
Im still not totally convinced LaMotta took a dive against Fox, but I disagree with those who would put Fox down as a mediocre fighter. I was at ringside on February 28, 1947, when he first fought Gus Lesnevich, and far from being exposed by Gus, he put up a credible fight against one of the best fighters of the time (Ring Magazines 1947 Fighter of the Year). Fox staggered Gus in the third, and held on until he was put away in the tenth. Fox followed up his first career loss with impressive wins against a couple of good fighters, George Kochan and Artie Levine plus a few tankers before his devastating loss in a rematch with Lesnevich in 1948. I concede that Foxs record of forty-three consecutive knock out wins at the beginning of his career was mostly manufactured, but by the time he fought LaMotta I thought he had a reasonable chance to win. Jake was coming off an embarrassing loss to journeyman Cecil Hudson a few months earlier and looked vulnerable. We may never know, to my satisfaction at least, whether LaMotta took a dive, but lets not put down Billy Fox so quickly; he was a credible fighter by the time he fought LaMotta, and had a punch that could stagger the best of them.
Wow, you really ARE "OldW". I'm very thankful for your presence here, you remember when boxing was boxing. Regarding this specific fight, I want to relay something I overheard by old boxing trainer say back in the mid-80s. I was your typical youngster who turned to boxing in hopes of avoiding being beaten up at school and I was fortunate enough to grow up in Miami, where there was no shortage of quality boxing instruction (at least compared to most cities). Fighters who had trained at the gym included Ali, Sugar Ray Leonard, and Alexis Arguello, and the grizzled old-timers from boxing's earlier heyday had retired to the sunny weather and would stop by on occasion (good ol' Kingfish Levinski; I wouldn't buy a tie from him, but I could listen to him talk for hours). Anyways, my trainer, an old-timer who cut his teeth in New York in the 1940s, was discussing some upcoming "Miami Beach Hotel Fights" with a fellow who was turning pro. And he said, very offhandedly, that on any good-sized fight card, (and I'll quote from memory here), "25% of all the fights aren't on the level in some way." Some were open fixes, he went on to explain, and some were dives, while some used "professional opponents" who knew coming in that they weren't expected to try and win. Now perhaps he was exaggerating, but I've never doubted that the degree of chicanery in boxing was quite significant during that era, and is still fairly high today, especially compared to other big-time sports.
Thanks Evil One. As a high school student, I used to hang out after school at Allie Ridgeways gym in Hackensack. It was there that I met Gus Lesnevich and struck up a friendship playing handball with him. My dad took me to a few of his fights including the two Fox fights, the second of which he invited us to hang out before the fight in his dressing room. Allie Ridgeways attracted a number of top Jersey fighters. I met Lee Savold, Pat Comiskey, Red Cochrane, Tippy Larkin, Bernie Reynolds and Freddie Schott there. You probably havent heard of the last two, but Freddie ran up a record of over 40 wins before being decisioned by Joe Baksi. I saw all of these guys fighting at one time or another. Highlights include: Comiskey beating Lee Oma in Jersey City, Ike Williams dropping Larkin at MSG, Savold putting away the Italian champ Gino Buonvino in :54 of the first round at the Garden and his knock out loss by Joe Louis. Im interested in promoting Lesnevich for the Boxing Hall of Fame. He certainly earned it, and there are many so honored who were not as worthy as he. Any help would be appreciated.
mendoza you claim to have seen this fight on film. where can it be purchased or viewed? id love to add that and any other obscure lamotta fights to my collection. please reply or anyone that can help please reply.
I appreciate you have done research on this ,and I haven't ,but looking at Fox's record ,most of his wins are over the type of guys Lamar Clark kod,ie fighters with more losses than wins on their record.What motive do you think Lamotta had admitting to a dive some time after the event? I think it was a fix myself,Fox was a built up fighter his kos are on the level of a Carnera imo.
NY Times' sports editor before Fox's first fight with Lesnevich went so far as to comparing him to Joe Louis. Turned out to be wrong, but the point is many people were impressed by Fox nevertheless. Nobody was impressed by Lamar Clark in the same manner.
Perhaps, but I just read the New York Times' next day report on the fight written by the very respected James P Dawson. He leaves no real doubt that he thinks he saw a fixed fight, mentioning the rumours that were swirling around, LaMotta's strange performance from the first round on, etc. It is full of lines like "LaMotta acted like his knees were buckling." Dawson reports the final barrage as mainly being ineffective and Fox missing again and again and looking amateurish while LaMotta makes no attempt to fight back. I have no inside info, but if it looks like a fix, walks like a fix, and quacks like a fix, maybe it was a fix, and we should just accept LaMotta's word for it. After all, he should know.
Hard for me to stay away from this thread, S13. You've countered every argument that Jake went in the water for Fox with one-after-another logical, dispassionate -- wholly credible -- rejoinders?...and you've stuck to your guns under a lot of pressure -- to your credit. So, it's clear, you've made up your mind, and have all the facts to back it up. What evidence would you have to have to change your mind?