Gene Fullmer vs Jake LaMotta

LaMotta is stronger and tougher I think, and would force Fullmer on the backfoot as usual when Fullmer faced a man equally strong and determined as himself (see Basilio, Lausse, Tiger fights). I'm impressed by Fullmer's performance against Basilio, but LaMotta was bigger than Basilio, bigger than Fullmer in fact though not notably so. I think LaMotta's just the better technical fighter in the type of a brawl that this fight would end up being. Fullmer's cross-arm defense worked well for him, but he was still a rather stationary target compared to the bobbing & weaving LaMotta while not running around the ring, and his often wild unorthodox punches would be met with LaMotta's sharper punching, especially the double jabs and left hooks to the body and head.

 

LaMotta was easily as tough as Gene Fullmer, and had much better boxing skills...Jake by a wide decision...

 

Fullmer stronger, Jake better boxer

 

I don't know about that.

 

I don't know about that "Jake better boxer"....

 

have a look at his later fights when he was fighting at light heavy.
he had a lot of guile.
lamotta would decision fullmer, he has a better chin and is a far better boxer

 

I'm not dead sure about the winner but I'd think the safest bet would be LaMotta by decision. The odds of either guy scoring a knockout...heh. And as far as who is definitively stronger or has a definitively better ring IQ, I wouldn't be that certain about it based on what I've seen of them.

 

Jake by dec ,but Fullmer's awkward "style", makes it closer than many predict,imo.

 

do you think fullmer would make the fight a stinker too ??

 

...Felt the need to put "style" in quotation marks, ey? :think

 

Yes ,at some point ,I beleive Fullmer would change up to the way he fought Tiger in their second encounter ,and box ,trying to keep some distance between Jake and himself. Against Tiger , Fullmer sneaked a draw with this strategy, and after realising Lamotta is able to match him in -side,and is faster of hand I think this is probably what he would do.

 

I am not a Fullmer fan, for me, he excelled at no one particular thing ,but he was undeniably effective,ie he maximised what he had.

 

I think Fullmer actually gets sold a bit short as just a mauling, spoiling sort of slugger. The way he beat Robinson was by getting off first with his own jab, knocking SRR off-balance, and then burrowing inside with his inside mauls. It was a very clever plan and it worked a treat.

In this bout I think Fullmer has the better jab and could for stretches keep Lamotta off-balance with it as Lamotta tries to come forward, and then on the inside Fullmer's spoiling attack could make it very hard for Lamotta to do any clean work.

 

Fullmer was undeniably a mauling and spoiling slugger though. Whether he came in behind the jab or not, his objective was clear, to make it as rough and ugly a fight as possible.

In my opinion LaMotta had the faster, better and more consistent jab. Fullmer was more straight-up, a solid guard, and had better footwork. A prime LaMotta (mid 40's) would have been hell for an old Robinson and certainly wouldn't ever have been taken out with one punch.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WZbFJXV50dA[/ame]


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tL2gk074zVk[/ame]