Dick Tiger vs. Marcel Cerdan

Would've been a barn-burner. But I'm of the "if you're there to bang with Tiger, you're going to lose" state of mind.

 

I agree that if Cerdan looks to meet Tiger head-on in a shootout he would lose, most likely by KO at that, but who`s to say Cerdan would have elected to brawl with Tiger? Cerdan was an adaptable and cagey fighter, and I think he would have boxed Tiger much the same way he did Zale in their fight and only mix it up with him in spurts.

Cerdan knew that even an old Zale still had enough pop in his fists to hurt him, so he boxed him instead for the first 6 rounds before really turning up the pressure once those bodyshots had started to take their toll on his older opponent. Against Tiger however he would have to stick with that strategy for duration of the fight and only engage his stronger foe in spurts, as he is not going to get the better of any prolonged exchanges against Tiger when they are chest to chest, that is where Tiger was at his best.

With that said though even if Cerdan fought that way I do not think he would walk away the victor when all is said and done, as I feel that Tiger would have taken over by the last third of the fight and won the remaining rounds to get the nod. Tiger`s short left hook in close which he would often double even triple up on would serve him well in this fight, as would his advantage in physical strenght as this is one guy that Cerdan wouldn`t be able to back up or muscle in close.

Cerdan would probably do well for the first half of the fight, but the amount of energy he will expend trying to keep Tiger at bay will see him fade enough down the stretch enough for Dick to take over during the last four-five rounds and win the decision. I wouldn`t be surprised if Tiger dropped him either, as he was very adept at timing his oppoenents in the middle of an exchange with his left hook. Cerdan would have been game to the final bell, but Tiger just too strong and well conditioned for the Frenchman to deal with, much like LaMotta was.

 

Great post. Mine was short and to the point, perhaps why it seemed a bit vague. What I generally meant was that unless you're an excellent out-boxer, you're not likely to beat Tiger, being as you'd be too hittable throughout the fight. And Cerdan struck me as a boxer/brawler type. I don't think he has the versatility of a Griffith to outbox Tiger behind the jab all night long.

 

I agree with you on Cerdan and his being more of a boxer-puncher-swarmer, which is whyb we both see the same outcome. Cerdan could box very well when he chose to but even then he wasn`t hard to find and would have been in Tiger`s punching range most of the time as he didn`t have that bounce in his step that a Griffith or Archer had to dance out of harm`s way when Tiger got too close. Cerdan would have fought it out with him when that happened before backing off again, Griff and Joey wouldn`t have and would have tied him up and turned him instead before backing away.

 

Maybe I'm missing something on Tiger, but he lost 17 decsisions, and only had 27 KO's in 82 fights.

Cerdan was a good boxer with a top chin. He only has 4 losses in 115 fights. Two of the losses are DQ's. His lost to LaMotta was due to a injured shoulder when Lamotta pushed him down.

I think Cerdan is one of the most under rated guys out there.

Cerdan UD over Tiger.

 

Tiger would have crushed Cerdan.

 

Maybe I'm missing something on Robinson. But the guy had 19 losses. Sven Ottke on the other hand never lost a fight. Very underrated is Ottke.

Ottke UD Robinson.

 

Gunna b a great FIGHT this one, i like Cerdan even though he has his detractors over his over-all comp. Imo he did enough 2 b considered great h2h at 160. Tiger on the other hand is one that you wouldnt take sum1 with Cerdan's style over. But i'll put myslf out, Cerdan in a great 1 imo

 

Your post is twoddle and you know it.
Robinson lost 1 fight in his prime a dec to Lamotta in 1943 when he was a Welter fighting a Middle.
Ray didnt lose another fight for 8 years,14 men beat him 10 of them were Champions,the others were top 10 ranked or [Leahy were or had been Champion of their country].Ray lost to Tiger Jones when he was making a comeback,he was 36 when he lost to Fullmer ,and 37 when he lost to Basilio,he was over 40 when he lost his remaining fights,44 when he lost his last one to the no1 contender Archer.
Tiger lost to such greats as Tommy West in 52,53,54,Alan Dean55,Gerry Mcnally,Jimmy Lynas,George Roe,Alan Dean ,all in 55,Willie Armstrong 57.His competiton improved then he lost to Spider Webb58,Randy Sandy,RoryCalhoun,Giardello,in 59,Wilf Greaves60,Giardello 63,Archer 64.Griffith 66 ,Foster 68,Griffith 70.
Thats 8 losses to unranked and unknown fighters.,and 10 to ranked or fringe contenders ,ie Calhoun and Sandy.Tiger lost to Archer when he was 35 Robinson when he was 44.Tigers losses 4 were to champions.There is no comparison .Tiger was a great midlle weight ,but not the beast he is made out here.Giardello was his master ,and its possible old time Champions like Papke and Klaus could have more than held there own in a punch out with Tiger,big Welter Griffith beat him twice.

 

I think Cerdan was the better fighter..but a close call SD15

 

Tiger, by UD. Competitive tussle.

 

we all saw how much trouble cerdan has with strong pressure fighters(lamotta), and tiger might be the strongest 160lber of all time. I favor tiger here by close decision. Cerdan liked to work in the trenches, and you are not going to beat tiger in that regard.

 

You are missing alot on tiger. Watch the film of him in his prime. Tiger was a great fighter, he fought very often against tough competition and suffered some early losses, but at his peak he was one of the best. Cerdan's record is inflated with european garbage, I think he sometimes gets overated cause of his record. Who did he ever beat?

Lamotta beat cerdan because he was the better more hungry fighter. Lamotta knocked cerdan down in the first, then cerdan tried to get physical with him and it was lamotta's superior strength that caused cerdan to get injured. Before the injury even happened lamotta was beating the **** out of marcel.

 

i heard that injury came against lamotta came in round one. and as far as i know, cerdan was already past his best when he finally got a shot at the title.

sure, zale was 35, but in his last fight he had no trouble knocking rocky graziano unconcious and making it look sooo easy.

and he dealt out some pretty nice punishment on cerdan, but cerdan took it.

sure, cerdans record was inflated, but he could fight.

i think this goes down similar to fullmer vs tiger II..........it ending in a draw or a split verdict for either guy.