LaMotta Screwjobs?

The Oscars screwed Martin Scorsese for not giving him the Best Director award for Raging Bull.

It took them about a quarter of a century to give him his "make-up award".

 

I'm not claiming Fox was an excellent boxer, but based on what I've read on him, and what I read and seen of Satterfield, I've come to believe he was a better boxer than Satterfield. And certainly he was not feather-fisted.

Which column do you want me to read? Jan 1948 Ring, page 6:

"Many and varied were the excuses offered for LaMotta's complete collapse. Most of the scribes termed it a fake fight. But this writer does not subscribe to rumors that a "fix" had been prearranged, with Jake guaranteeing to lose." ... etc etc
The round-by-round report certainly doesn't look like what LaMotta wrote in 19th chapter of his bio.

 

Satterfield outpointed Harold Johnson. You think Fox is capable of doing that?

better yet, is fox capable of surviving more than 1 round if he ever fought satterfield?

 

:huh

 

On "LaMotta" and "honest" not belonging in the same sentence: have you read LaMotta's autobiography? He comes off as extremely honest there, coming out with all kinds of ugly, gruesome, unflattering details about his life and actions.

 

By comparison, LaMotta comes across as a saint in the movie compared to the disgusting things he admitted to doing in his autobiography.

 

LaMotta screwjobs? 15 year old Vikki for starters. Then, there are the other half dozen wives.

 

I said, Dan Parker, not Ring magazine which was bank rolled by promoters throughout its history. Dan Parker was considered one the premier journalists of the day, who was in the know and crusaded vehemently against LaMotta in the follow up to the fight. It was probably he more than anyone who led the senate hearings into organized crime in boxing in which LaMotta finally admitted under publicly and under oath that he took a dive (and keep in mind he had absolutely nothing to gain from this, and as a result his life was put into danger). Parker stated after the fight that LaMotta would not have won an academy award (or something to that effect) for his lack of acting skills in throwing the fight to Fox.

 

Was LaMotta-Fox filmed?

 

no

 

JG

Sorry, but my principles don't allow me to trust just words, without a single piece of evidence. No matter how honest a person who's trying to persuade me of the opposite is, I need something more than "trust my words" argument.[/QUOTE]

Just wondered, S, what would you consider credible "evidence"?

 

Here we go again....

Do pray tell though Senya, how Jose Basora was past his prime in all his fights against LaMotta, as you claimed in this thread long ago....

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=31005

Or better yet, how Mayweather would have outpointed him with ease

 

Satterfield a journeyman? For someone who is obssessed with facts and statistics such as yourself I would have thought that you knew that he was a top contender for years... hardly the hallmark of a journeyman. Bob could box very well when the mood suited him, he wasn`t a wild swinging slugger like a Pajarito Moreno type, not even close.

And so what if Satterfield staggered and stunned LaMotta a few times in their bout? You speak as if that is some kind of black mark against Jake, yet he took some bombs from a man who knocked out friggin heavyweights! If anything, the fact that Jake took those bombs and remained upright is a testament to just how fantastic his chin was, yet you seem to think otherwise which is a foolish but hey to each their own.

 

I've seen what she looked like. I don't blame him.

 

I've seen what he looked like. I blame her.