Tim Conn, You are so right about your dad...When he was just twenty years old.a baby,Billy was thrown in with such great and more experienced middleweights as Young Corbett-= W-L Teddy Yarosz= W-L Solly Krieger Oscar Rankins Fred Apostoli Babe Risko Vince Dundee, etc, Tim ,I remember that article that the great boxing writer Frank Graham wrote, describing how he would have favored Billy Conn over Ray Robinson, at middleweight..I believe Graham wrote this article in the old NY Journal American... Billy Conn would have whipped the best Jake Lamotta, both at middleweight...I ad mired your father very much,just behind Harry Greb of course....
The truth about Billy Conn is that he was well on his way to building a resume like that of Ezzard Charles or Archie Moore before the war cut his career short. His resume prior to his 22nd birthday is simply incredible.
While I agree with this post overall, I want to mention that LaMotta had a defence and was not easy to hit. This is a myth.
As far as Billy Conn and Ray Robinson at middle?...I'll go along with Red Smith. "I don't know whether you're right or not." I'll lean towards the later...(heavier than middle? different story.)
Tim Conn is talking out of his arse. None of those guys he listed would have beaten a prime Jake Lamotta, including Tony Zale. Also Lamotta did have defense, in fact he was very slick on defense the way he slipped jabs with his head movement, and the way he rolled punches with his upperbody movement. I think Tim had one too many brewski's when he typed that! lol
Lamotta, is, imo, one of the most overated fighters on this board. I wonder how highly he would be rated, if it wasnt for Robert Deniro. A good fighter, noone denies and very tough, but was he really as good as someone like say a Tony Zale, i dont think so. I dont think there is any question that in open weights, Billy Conn murders him. He doesnt necessarilly knock him out, because Jake is very tough, but i do think it is the most likely scenario. I do like the point that under the middleweight primes, billy was far less experienced. This would be a cracking fight. But i tend to think that this is a fight where the inexperienced Billy Conn rises to the occassion and beats the favoured LaMOtta. Much closer fight though, and i think that Jake does have every chance in it but i go with Conn.
Not only do I think Lamotta was as good as Zale, I think Jake in his prime was signifigantly better than Zale. I truly believe Zale ducked Jake Lamotta around 1946, and took on the easier option in Graziano instead, due to fear of losing to Lamotta. I am not the only one with this opinion. I am tired though, and will debate this more with you in the morning.
Hm, do you think the Zale who had the great trilogy with Graziano was prime? I think he was past it. I´d take Prime LaMotta over past it Zale without hesitation but prime for prime ... I think Zale would beat him.
I have seen Jake Lamotta fight..Cunning and so tough.But there is one fighter who at his best would have licked Jake Lamotta, and that was the forgotten Fred Apostoli..Aside from his fights with Ceferino Garcia, Apostoli looks tremendous on film...Very tempermental though was Apostoli...