Jake Lamotta vs Ray Leonard

LaMotta IMO. If Hagler had put on half the pressure LaMotta would against Leonard Ray would never have fought again. Assuming he's 100% (not a given) Jake brings the same kind of heat as Duran did in Montreal, he'd deny Leonard the space he wants, and though Leonard would probably outbox him in the early stages, the stronger, relentless LaMotta grinds him down and takes the decision.

 

LaMotta just walks over him. Leonard wouldn't be able to stay away from him, or keep LaMotta off of him.

 

Leonard, if you can beat Hagler you can beat Lamotta and Leonard at MW is much bigger/stronger than the 144lb Robinson that Lamotta beat

 

From which year are you taking Leonard from ? If it's the 1987 version,then La Motta outworks him,to take a close decision. If it's the prime 1981/82 incarnation moving up to the higher weight,then Ray scores a lopsided verdict against Jake.

 

LaMotta would outwork him to a close decision, I'd expect.

 

To me this hinges on whether Ray can duplicate SRR's feats against Jake,Ray is better defensively than Sugar, but does not hit as hard. I think Jake does a Montreal Duran on him ,he is bigger than Duran ,and more powerful. Interesting matchup , Ray got Hagler at the right time ,prime for prime he gets beat.And he would here,imo.

 

If Leonard fights Lamotta, like he fought Duran in the second fight. I would pick Leonard.
If Leonard goes after Jake I 'd take Jake. Jake would always have a chance because of his relentless pressure and size he would have over Leonard.

 

Same hogwash about Leonard every, time. I'm coming off as a a die hard fan here when just trying to give a great fighter, who doesn't mean anymore to me than other great fighters, his due.

The Hagler that Leonard beat was better in every single way than LaMotta except strength an chin, which was equal. He was much better than the LaMotta in the last Robinson fight.

This board is boring me more and more. Hardly two in ten posters are of any quality anymore. A ****ing joke is what it is. Leonard wins this one, and it shouldn't even be much of a debate for anyone who has a clue.

 

I'd say Lamotta has a higher workrate to be fair and you could argue Leonard was a bit gassed after 5 rounds against Hagler, although he was purposely frontrunning to build up an early lead.

We know Leonard gets hated on. Lamotta also tends to get very overrated from beating a 144lb Robinson, Leonard may have been 165lbs in the ring against Hagler, so he's a much better middleweight due to size/strength than that version of Robinson. Obviously Lamotta has other good wins, but Holman Williams for instance was 34 with 177 fights when he fought him, Cerdan may have been injured

 

No one not named PowerPuncher should favour Leonard in this one.

 

Not sure I follow you.
LaMotta was a career middleweight, with numerous wins over good and great fighters from welter to light-heavy.
Leonard's resume at middleweight and above is almost non-existent. Really just one big win (close and disputed) against Hagler, and a few other irrelevant fights.

And LaMotta at his best was a great middleweight.

You make a lot of bold statements as if they are self-evident, but even a brief study of the resumes, or knowledge of the fighters should at least show that LaMotta should NOT be reduced to some hapless underdog, as you would have it.

 

If you look at Leonard's results from the old MW limit he has Hagler, Duran (who was possibly at a similar stage of his career to Holman Williams), Kalule and a draw with Hearns (which was a close loss). This trumps Lamotta's top 3 wins at theweight and the Hearns loss is no worse than the Marshall loss. And Marshall was quoted as saying 'Lamotta wouldn't beat any of the Murderer's Row Crew'.

If you're going to discount Leonard's results at welterweight fine, but you should also disregard Lamotta's wins over Robinson and Zivic as they were WWs in the ring, both smaller than WW Hearns for one.

 

Yeah, but was that the best LaMotta? That was a weight-drained past his prime LaMotta. Just because he was champ doesn't mean it was the best version of him. I would dispute that that Hagler was better than virtually any version of LaMotta, particularly seeing how stupid he fought in the early rounds.

I'll just say this. If It's 15 rounds Ray loses.

 

Not that I think it's relevant, but what are LaMotta's top 3 wins at MW ?

LaMotta's 5th fight with Robinson was a close loss too.

Leonard also has the Kevin Howard and Don Lalonde fights for his above-WW resume too, remember. :good

Well, I'm not really comparing resumes, per se. I'm interested in information relevant to this particular match up.
It would make sense to mostly discount Leonard's wins over guys like Benitez and even Duran, who were small and bear no resemblance to LaMotta.
And on the other hand, it would make sense to actually look at LaMotta's wins over WWs and LMWs too, since Leonard was a welter/small-middle.

LaMotta was a great middlweight who at his best could beat a guy like Robinson, and almost beat him twice, and beat other slick skillful 150-pound boxers of his time, and bigger ones too.
Leonard has the close, disputed win over a fading Hagler and no other wins over big rugged durable middleweights.