Jake Lamotta vs. Marvin Hagler

I'm not seeing why Hagler would be troubled by LaMotta's size. Oppositely, LaMotta would struggle with Hagler's significant reach advantage.

LaMotta was undoubtedly tough. However, neither his toughness nor his iron chin would stop Hagler from landing scoring punches.

If it came to the fight being won or lost on the inside, then it could be interesting. But some of Hagler's own work on the inside was impressive - he was particularly adept at shifting from short-to-mid-range, where he could unleash some of the more soul-sucking punches in his armory.

I don't see that there would be a need for Hagler to engage in a toe-to-toe war, when he had the advantage at longer range and the footwork to adapt his distance and create angles, at will. Sure, there'd be no avoiding close-range action for the whole fight. But, it's not a risk Hagler couldn't mitigate (with his own great inside work and his ability to reassert his positioning and distance, with deft footwork) and so, I am not sure LaMotta troubles Hagler here - not to the extent of it being a game-changer - but it's a fair shout, nonetheless.

Yep - Willpower - Both Hagler and LaMotta had it in droves. I feel sure Hagler faced strong-willed opponents too. It's an intangible, which is not unique to LaMotta. He may well have fought to win every round, but he lost his fair share of rounds in the process.


LaMotta was strong, a superb body puncher and, despite his reputation for average power, his punches downstairs were savage. But, as previously mentioned, Hagler doesn't need to make this an easy path for LaMotta.

LaMotta's windmilling shots upstairs were not especially sharp and often inaccurate, in my book. Even though they might come in at odd angles and surprise his opponent on occasion, his head shots were average in power, at best. He did carry a solid left-hook, though.

But LaMotta also seemed to have a reliance on setting his feet, in order to set up and get any combinations off - and he looked wide open at times when cueing up an attack. I can not only see Hagler disrupting LaMotta enough to make it very difficult for him to deliver on his best work, but also envisage Hagler landing with frequent ease.

Hagler was a rare talent - an all-round, precision operator, with an instinct for finding and taking advantage of any openings. And, finding openings against LaMotta wouldn't be a problem - his left side would be open season for Hagler and LaMotta's slips and rolls would be thin defense against Hagler's right jabs and hooks.

On balance, Hagler's a clear favorite for my money and, whilst I imagine it would be a long night over the distance, I wouldn't rule out Hagler forcing a late stoppage. Not the most likely outcome, but not an implausible result. Either way, LaMotta would look a mess by the end of it.

I tend to agree that LaMotta is often underrated, but he's not being underrated here. He's being matched against arguably the greatest middleweight of all time. It's hard to consider LaMotta's round-after-round tenacity being sufficient by itself. He's not going to consistently steal enough rounds, from a boxer of Hagler's class, to assure him victory.

Hagler doesn't need to knock LaMotta out. He just needs to be better - and, Hagler is just better.

 

I got lamotta he beat peak sugar ray robinson, almost did it twice(crowd boo'd a split decision) he fought and beat the tougher competition (hagler beat up a weakass middleweight division and his best wins are against a past prime lightweight and welterweight) jakes style was crouching , the one tactic duran was able to do was crouch under haglers rear hand and get inside, I believe Lamotta is better on the inside than duran (not by a lot) and a crouching bigger version of duran would beat up on hagler.

 

Hagler has the tools to beat Jake but it won't be a one sided beat down as some are suggesting. Both guys would take damage. Jake is getting inside, he'll pay a price for it. He return some as well. LaMotta had some finesse to his game. Even the sneaky short jab and crisp combinations.
Hagler's footwork and jab would be the difference. Marvin Hagler the best footwork I've ever seen. Hagler was able adjust with Briscoe when Bennie cut him. He stayed away and took the drama out of it.
The fans in Philly didn't get what we hoped at the time.

 

Like this a lot, a well thought out prognosis, broken down into language that can be appreciated and understood, you know your stuff fella, if I might put my small by comparison contribution, I see MH winning , and comfortably by the way, sliding in and out, avoiding Jakes hooks and jabs, spearing him with a (vastly underrated ) right jab, mixing up to head and body, and making Jake miss and flounder, I agree a stoppage would appear unlikely, I wouldn't rule out the ref pulling off a rampaging Hagler and come to LaMottas rescue in the latter stages of a 15 rounder. keep well.

 

I'm more interested to ponder just how many untouchable years in flimed boxing history exist in which this wouldn't be the FOTY.