Harada was rated 27th in a list of the best 50 P4P fighters in the last 50 years by the ring mag in 1996, while LaMotta was rated 28th in the list, but who should have ranked higher than who on this list out of these two? Which of these two was better P4P in their respective primes? The ring mag in on Harada: Quality of competition: 8 Bouts v top 50 fighters: 1 Why he was on the list: Robbed of the featherweight title, he should have been a three division champ. What he could have done to improve his ranking: Fought Johnny Famechon for the first time anywhere but Sidney. LaMotta info: Quality of competition: 10 Bouts v top 50 fighters: 1 Why he`s here: He was willing to tackle the best black fighters of his era. And he beat Sugar Ray when nobody else could. What he could have done to get a higher ranking: Ducked Sugar Ray when he was champ.
Yes, Harada both better and greater imo, clearly so. Jake was terrific at his peak, mind, but the wee fighting one was a clear step above.
I only fairly recently had to confront myself enough to rate Pac above Harada. To give you an idea how highly I think of Harada. I do have him quite a bit above Baby Jake LaMottala.