Jake lamotta v Terry Norris

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by redrooster, Feb 12, 2012.


  1. Waynegrade

    Waynegrade Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,684
    29
    Jul 27, 2008
    But you didn`t have to be a big puncher with Norris, Keith Mullings, Simon Brown...
     
  2. Waynegrade

    Waynegrade Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,684
    29
    Jul 27, 2008
    LaMotta stops him late. LaMotta would laugh at Norris` attempts to hurt him, and he is just way too big for Norris...You ALWAYS have to factor Norris` fine china chin into any hypothetical all time match up...I mean blown up welters KO`d him...
     
  3. carlosg815

    carlosg815 Member Full Member

    466
    1
    Jun 6, 2011
    Being a huge fan of Terry Norris, I have to say that I think that Jake Lamotta would be too tough and rugged for Norris and would eventually catch him one too many times and put him away for a KO.

    The odds of Norris being able to sustain the same speed over 12-15 rounds against Lamotta is not likely and as far as I'm concerned, knocking out Lamotta just isn't going to happen.
     
  4. techks

    techks ATG list Killah! Full Member

    19,779
    701
    Dec 6, 2009
    He beat Castro who was a good puncher. People act like if he faces a puncher he loses which isn't always the case. Mostly though.
     
  5. Waynegrade

    Waynegrade Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,684
    29
    Jul 27, 2008
    True he beat Castro. But seriously though, does anyone rank Mullings or Brown at top all time power list ?? I didn`t even mention JJ, who IS a big hitter... People conveniently look the other way when it comes to Norris weak chin...
     
  6. techks

    techks ATG list Killah! Full Member

    19,779
    701
    Dec 6, 2009
    People primarily bring up his bad chin which was a weakness of course but he made a decent career with that big disadvantage. Also he beat Mugabi who albeit was faded, could still bang and was a champion at the time.
     
  7. redrooster

    redrooster Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,635
    332
    Jan 29, 2005
    how can you tell about his early career if there is no film of him?

    as for him being a highly evolved fighter, by the time of his second defense he didnt appear to have any new weapons, just a pesky jab out of a crouch

    Am I wrong or did he not fall behind in his previous defense?

    Norris on points
     
  8. Stonehands89

    Stonehands89 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,775
    312
    Dec 12, 2005
    The same way I can tell recount the Battle of Gettysburg though there is no film of it. Come on man.

    You do realize of course that LaMotta didn't get his first title shot until he was 88 fights in, right? If you want to level the field, then sure, let's focus on a past-prime LaMotta. Prime Norris, let's remember, made his name sweeping out the refuse of "used to be's" like Leonard, Taylor, Curry, and Mugabi -3 of whom were WWs. That's Norris in 90, 91, 92. Now take a good look at what LaMotta was doing in 43, 44, 45.

    If you want to take them at their respective best, my guy is fighting all comers and going toe-to-toe with Murderers' Row.

    Comparatively speaking, your guy is on easy street with a broom.