Jake LaMotta vs Tommy Hearns

[Sweet Science]

I think this would make an interesting match up. I really can't decide who whould win this encounter.

Obviously, Jake had that granite chin, great stamina and an all round aggressive style. He was also naturally bigger, stronger and just wouldn't let up with the pressure.

On the other hand, Hearns had the advantage in height, reach, speed and one punch power. . He was a murderous puncher and when he chooses to is very difficult to out box.

I can't come to a definitive answer on who would be victorious.

What are your thoughts?

[fists of fury]

Honestly, I think Hearns has all the tools to beat Lamotta fairly easily. Faster, better technically, much better power, more mobile, taller, reach advantage...Lamotta is more durable but what other advantage does he have over Tommy? Hearn's chin wasn't very sturdy, but Lamotta didn't have the kind of power to seriously trouble Hearns. He'd apply the pressure no doubt, but Hearns could handle it with his reach and mobility. Hearn's awesome body punching would also slow Lamotta's advances down considerably.
If anyone has the power to stop Lamotta it's Hearns, and he had the skills to box to a decision if he needs to.

[Sweet Science]

Honestly, I think Hearns has all the tools to beat Lamotta fairly easily. Faster, better technically, much better power, more mobile, taller, reach advantage...Lamotta is more durable but what other advantage does he have over Tommy? Hearn's chin wasn't very sturdy, but Lamotta didn't have the kind of power to seriously trouble Hearns. He'd apply the pressure no doubt, but Hearns could handle it with his reach and mobility. Hearn's awesome body punching would also slow Lamotta's advances down considerably.
If anyone has the power to stop Lamotta it's Hearns, and he had the skills to box to a decision if he needs to.

Interesting, but don't forget Robinson had all those advantages over LaMotta too (including better mobility and speed than Hearns), But Jake was still able to beat him in their 2nd bout. The 1st man to do so. And thats the measure of the man known as The Bronx Bull.

[fists of fury]

Yeah, I was thinking that when I posted.
However Ray won the other 5, and that's a pretty convincing statistic to me. Not to say that Hearns was quite as good as Robinson, but he was a helluva boxer and puncher, which is a pretty rare combination.

[pugilist_boyd]

But Also Several Of The Wins Over Jake Were Close And Contraversal I Think Jake Would Have Caught Hearns In The Late Rounds

[mcvey]

I think this would make an interesting match up. I really can't decide who whould win this encounter.

Obviously, Jake had that granite chin, great stamina and an all round aggressive style. He was also naturally bigger, stronger and just wouldn't let up with the pressure.

On the other hand, Hearns had the advantage in height, reach, speed and one punch power. . He was a murderous puncher and when he chooses to is very difficult to out box.

I can't come to a definitive answer on who would be victorious.

What are your thoughts?
Hearns by close decision ,but his ribs wouldnt want a rematch.

[Bummy Davis]

Lamotta crowds him and makes it tough, Hearns was great but no S.R.R., Jake takes it

[DaveTheWave]

Hearns by decision if he boxes and stays disciiplined-
Lamotta by late stoppage based on durability and pressure-
I can't decide.

[mr. magoo]

I have all the respect in the world for the heart and guts of Jake Lamotta, but in all fairness, Hearns just has way too much to offer him. Stylistically this is a bad matchup for Jake. Although he did manage to upset a prime Robinson once, I'm not sure that I'd bet money on him to pull off the same kind of miracle again.

Hearns by late round stoppage or a wide decision.

[Ted Stickles]

Jake in the late round because Hearns had problems with pressure fighters( Barkley) and Jake was a way better fighter than Barkley

[thunder06]

Lamotta fought 5 very close fights with SRR and the 6th was jake being an idiot. he would apply pressure like crazy to hearns and Lamotta was only knocked off his feet 1 time in 106 bouts so i dont think hearns, for all his power, is really gonna hurt jake. hearns started out as a light welterweight as an amateur and fought at light middleweight and middleweight for most of his professional career. although he did defeat andries and hill he wasnt a natural light heavy. jake however, started fighting as a light heavy and moved down to middle as a pro to have a size advantage. he also fought several over-the-weight bouts and had many light heavyweight pro fights. he even stated that his best fighting weight was around 170 lbs. he's bigger, more durable, and has a much harder chin. im picking jake by a close UD.

[Doppleganger]

Jake in the late round because Hearns had problems with pressure fighters( Barkley) and Jake was a way better fighter than Barkley I wouldn't put too much stock in what happened in either of the Barkley fights as a measure of how he would do against La Motta. The truth is that in the first bout Tommy was schooling Barkley and on the verge of stopping him when he got complacent. In the 2nd fight Tommy was basically a shot fighter but still looked several classes above Barkley when he opened up.

I think Hearns really has too many tools for La Motta to deal with. Tommy could box for 15 rounds without presenting too many counterpunching opportunities (ask Wilfred Benitez about that) and of course we all know he could punch. I see a late stoppage or wide UD for Tommy here.

[fists of fury]

Jake in the late round because Hearns had problems with pressure fighters( Barkley) and Jake was a way better fighter than Barkley

True, but then again Barkley was a pretty big middleweight, who scaled over six feet in height. Lamotta was what? 5'8 or 5'9 maybe? Ray was 5'11 and he looked quite a bit taller than Jake, and Tommy's 6'2.
Barkley was able to reach Hearns, but could Lamotta, at least consistently?

[Nemesis]

You Know What Is Funny?when People Say Lamotta Has A Granite Chin.look Back At The Guys He Was Fighting.i Dont See Any Guys He Fought Who Were Lets Say 30 Wins With 28 By Knock Outs I See More Like 30 Wins With 12 By Knock Out But Anyway Lamotta Isnt A Big Puncher At All.what Is His Record?around 90 Wins With Only 30 Kos?hearns Is A Bigger Puncher Than Robinson Who Stopped Him And Hearns Is Pretty Skilled As Well.i See Hearns Stopping Lamotta In Less Than 10 Rounds

Congratulations :good

You've just won an award for "dumbest post of the day"

Now bearing mind some of the pitiful stuff that gets posted in the GF, you have beaten off some tough competition.

Go back to boxrec with your 28ko's in 30 fights shit, does that make Sugar Ray Robinson a crap puncher because over the course of 201 (?) fights, he only finished with about a 54% ko percentage

[Raging B(_)LL]

I think that LaMotta would stop Hearns, especially if their bout is scheduled for 15 rounds. Hearns was by far the better boxer, but those weak/skinny legs of his wouldn`t hold up over a long distance fight. Tommy could punch like a mule`s kick, but he wouldn`t be able to discourage Jake from working his way in and pounding his body to shreds.

It is almost impossible to keep fighters like LaMotta at a distance because they are the type of rare fighters who will take your best shots, shrug them off, and still keep pressing forward.How can you keep fighters that take your best shots at distance? The hit but don`t be hit model of boxing does not apply to these warriors, at some point you will have to stand your ground and trade.

You have to outbrawl them over the distance, even if your outboxing them in spurts. Hearns will give angles and box, but LaMotta won`t allow it for too long. Even Sugar Ray Robinson, a better boxer than Tommy and far more durable had to fight large portions of their bouts on the inside because Jake took his jabs, right crosses and left hooks and came in anyway and pounded on his ribs to slow him down and make him more stationary as the fight wore on.

If boxing history has shown us one thing, it is that if you are willing and able to take the punishment, you can get inside on anybody (look at Frazier, Basilio, etc). I see LaMotta using the same approach that Hagler did when he fought Tommy, bore your way in at all costs and take the best right hands Tommy will throw your way to break him down mentally and physically.

Work over Hearns` ribs when in close quarters to weaken those twig legs of his and make him more stationary, and once his legs have tired and he has slowed down considerably, start going upstairs with more regularity. Tommy was nowhere near durable enough to last in a dogfight with someone as tough and physically strong as Jake. LaMotta would get inside on him one way or another, and he would rough him up in close and sap his strenght with his mauling tactics and bodyblows.

If the fight is scheduled for ten rounds, I think Tommy can get the nod although he might be holding for dear life towards the end... but in a twelve or fifteen rounder he gets stopped. I loved Tommy and have great respect for him and his abilitys and always enjpyed watching him in action, but Jake is just too strong, too tough and too relentless for Tommy to handle. Skilled fighters who could take what Tommy could dish out and keep pressing him will always pose a lot problems for him and likely stop him inside the distance.

LaMotta KO13 Hearns

[Raging B(_)LL]

You Know What Is Funny?when People Say Lamotta Has A Granite Chin.look Back At The Guys He Was Fighting.i Dont See Any Guys He Fought Who Were Lets Say 30 Wins With 28 By Knock Outs I See More Like 30 Wins With 12 By Knock Out But Anyway Lamotta Isnt A Big Puncher At All.what Is His Record?around 90 Wins With Only 30 Kos?hearns Is A Bigger Puncher Than Robinson Who Stopped Him And Hearns Is Pretty Skilled As Well.i See Hearns Stopping Lamotta In Less Than 10 Rounds

The reason you don`t see those fighters with 30 wins with 28 KOs on Jake`s resume is because he didn`t take on protected fighters who racked up impressive KO streaks against no hopers. In those days, you didn`t see those kinds of records that often anyway. Just because someone doesn`t have a high KO percentage it does not mean that they don`t punch hard.

Jake was a pretty good puncher contrary to popular belief, but when you are fighting durable fighters on a regular basis you will not be racking up an impressive KO streak. Jake took on solid opposition very early in his career, he wasn`t babied and put in against cream puffs to build up an impressive KO streak early on as many modern fighters are these days.

And the reason why people say LaMotta had a granite chin is simple, it`s because he walked through all the incoming fire that was thrown his way by all the fighters he fought who were regarded as hard hitting opponents. He was only ever dropped once which was at the hands of Danny Nardico who was considered a very hard hitter and was a bonafide lightheavyweight, in one of his final bouts when far past his prime.

Don`t let impressive KO records fool you into thinking the fighter with those numerous KOs is a deadly puncher, just like you shouldn`t assume that someone with a low KO percentage has pillows in his fists. What you should do instead is look at the quality of opposition of a fighter, not the amount of KOs they have on their resumes.

[Doc McCoy]

Great couple of posts Raging B(_)LL. :good

Styles make fights and you've convinced me on LaMotta - Hearns.

Tommy's best chance is to bomb Jake out and given LaMotta's propensity to take punishment I just don't see it.
Hearns realises this by rd4 or 5 and gets on his bike a la the first Leonard fight but tires late from the relentless pressure and volume of LaMotta's attack.

This would be a highly entertaing bout though. Good match-up.

[JohnThomas1]

You Know What Is Funny?when People Say Lamotta Has A Granite Chin.look Back At The Guys He Was Fighting.i Dont See Any Guys He Fought Who Were Lets Say 30 Wins With 28 By Knock Outs I See More Like 30 Wins With 12 By Knock Out But Anyway Lamotta Isnt A Big Puncher At All.what Is His Record?around 90 Wins With Only 30 Kos?hearns Is A Bigger Puncher Than Robinson Who Stopped Him And Hearns Is Pretty Skilled As Well.i See Hearns Stopping Lamotta In Less Than 10 Rounds

I think you just set a new standard for boxrec warriors.

[RoccoMarciano]

This would have the same result as Hagler vs Hearns... Jake creams the guy with the spindly legs and happy feet :)

Rocco

[Sonny's jab]

Hearns had shaky moments with too many 160 pounders for me to pick him over LaMotta, a big strong 160 pounder.

People say "ignore the Barkley fight" .... nah, it happened. Hearns also wobbled against Kinchen, Roldan, put to sleep by Marvin Hagler.
LaMotta aint ridiculously crude like Andries was in 1987, he's got enough and too tough. He'd get Hearns in a brawl and wear him down, turn those skinny legs to jelly.

[enquirer]

Hearns did get wobbled a few times at middle,but up to and including the hagler fight he displayed a sound enough chin,he took many clean shots versus marvin who was a better puncher than lamotta. After hagler he was wobbled by barkley,roldan and andries at lt heavy,who were all very good punchers...Kinchen was at super middle and hearns was very badly hurt in that fight. He was also stunned badly by leonard a few times in their rematch and dropped in a flash knockdown by barkley at lt heavy in their rematch....However,he still survived all those punches (except barkleys in their first fight!) and displayed better survival skills in those fights...At lt heavy and cruiser he was never in any serious danger of stoppage defeat from any of the guys he fought...Hearns chin problems i feel are exaggerated at times,and to check his chin you had to go through hell and serious punches to get to him....
Tommy could definately outbox lamotta,and with his power and speed he could possibly stop lamotta,i find it hard to believe lamotta could do a 'hagler' on tommy,i think only hagler in the whole of history could beat a prime tommy like that,lamotta does not have the tools....

[Vantage_West]

Interesting, but don't forget Robinson had all those advantages over LaMotta too (including better mobility and speed than Hearns), But Jake was still able to beat him in their 2nd bout. The 1st man to do so. And thats the measure of the man known as The Bronx Bull.well in hand speed i think heanrs has far more it's hearns stamina that would be a problem...but at middlewieght he never had the problem(wow blew my own thouht out of the air there)


i say a very clear ud for hearns to fast and i mean very fast his jab would pulvarise and that right hand would go swinging lamotta's advantages were being able to stayb inactive for a while and then come out right as rain and bash you to bits. but hearns was a very decent inside fighter he just didnt have the chin to be a fully fledged in-fighter.....

[combatesdeboxeo]

Hearns by decision if he boxes and stays disciiplined-
Lamotta by late stoppage based on durability and pressure-
I can't decide.

lamotta would win, too aggressive,too strong, and too durable

[The Morlocks]

Honestly, I think Hearns has all the tools to beat Lamotta fairly easily. Faster, better technically, much better power, more mobile, taller, reach advantage...Lamotta is more durable but what other advantage does he have over Tommy? Hearn's chin wasn't very sturdy, but Lamotta didn't have the kind of power to seriously trouble Hearns. He'd apply the pressure no doubt, but Hearns could handle it with his reach and mobility. Hearn's awesome body punching would also slow Lamotta's advances down considerably.
If anyone has the power to stop Lamotta it's Hearns, and he had the skills to box to a decision if he needs to.
LaMotta had a lot more power and boxing ability than you think. The Bull's body attack would tear Tommy up fast LaMotta in a 3 rd. mismatch.:hat

[MRBILL]

This dream fight would closely resemble the actual "Hearns-Roldan" 1987 WBC middleweight fight.......

Hearns has too much speed and damn good right hand power at 160 pounds, so I see Hearns picking LaMotta apart for a late round TKO win on cuts....

Roldan took a great wallop, but LaMotta took an even better wallop... But both "Roldan and LaMotta" would cut and bleed...

As long as Hearns doesn't lose focus against Jake LaMotta, I see Hearns doing a paint job on Jake....

MR.BILL:deal:hat:bbb

[Duodenum]

The big difference between Robby and Tommy is stamina and durability. Over the championship distance, Jake would hustle him severely. This could well be a longer version of LaMotta-Satterfield. Former amateur LHW LaMotta is not laying back on the ropes like former JWW Benitez. Hearns is going to be forced directly to the back foot, just as he was with Hagler. Also, don't forget that Marv was primarily a southpaw, and Jake was also known to switch.

Yes, like Hagler, LaMotta would be able to absorb Tommy's best shot, just as he did Satterfield's. Jake didn't typically wipe out opponents quickly like Marv often did, but Hearns would be in very desperate trouble as the rounds wore on. Over 15, I can't see him getting to the final bell. We've all seen how LaMotta finished off Dauthuille in their title rematch. Tommy probably opens up a sizable lead, and is ahead when he succumbs to the relentless pressure. The Jake of 1950 would be just a miserable bastard for any version of Hearns to contend with.

[DDDUUDDDEE]

Jeez, a hard one this...

Either Hearns by UD or Jake by a late round stoppage.

50/50 imo.

[burt bienstock]

The reason you don`t see those fighters with 30 wins with 28 KOs on Jake`s resume is because he didn`t take on protected fighters who racked up impressive KO streaks against no hopers. In those days, you didn`t see those kinds of records that often anyway. Just because someone doesn`t have a high KO percentage it does not mean that they don`t punch hard.

Jake was a pretty good puncher contrary to popular belief, but when you are fighting durable fighters on a regular basis you will not be racking up an impressive KO streak. Jake took on solid opposition very early in his career, he wasn`t babied and put in against cream puffs to build up an impressive KO streak early on as many modern fighters are these days.

And the reason why people say LaMotta had a granite chin is simple, it`s because he walked through all the incoming fire that was thrown his way by all the fighters he fought who were regarded as hard hitting opponents. He was only ever dropped once which was at the hands of Danny Nardico who was considered a very hard hitter and was a bonafide lightheavyweight, in one of his final bouts when far past his prime.

Don`t let impressive KO records fool you into thinking the fighter with those numerous KOs is a deadly puncher, just like you shouldn`t assume that someone with a low KO percentage has pillows in his fists. What you should do instead is look at the quality of opposition of a fighter, not the amount of KOs they have on their resumes.
Well said !.When in his first year LaMotta was throw in with the likes of
Lorenzo Strickland, Jimmy Reeves 2, Nate Bolden,and then Jose Basora,
Jimmy Edgar, Vic Dellicurti etc...Tough guys for the 20 year old LaMotta.

[GPater11093]

Honestly, I think Hearns has all the tools to beat Lamotta fairly easily. Faster, better technically, much better power, more mobile, taller, reach advantage...Lamotta is more durable but what other advantage does he have over Tommy? Hearn's chin wasn't very sturdy, but Lamotta didn't have the kind of power to seriously trouble Hearns. He'd apply the pressure no doubt, but Hearns could handle it with his reach and mobility. Hearn's awesome body punching would also slow Lamotta's advances down considerably.
If anyone has the power to stop Lamotta it's Hearns, and he had the skills to box to a decision if he needs to.

Thing is though it wasn't Hearns chin that was suspect but also his resistance to body attacks and, dare I say it, stamina or a batter word, endurance.

The type of pressure Lamotta puts on would be the type of pressure that would effect Hearns.

I think that LaMotta would stop Hearns, especially if their bout is scheduled for 15 rounds. Hearns was by far the better boxer, but those weak/skinny legs of his wouldn`t hold up over a long distance fight. Tommy could punch like a mule`s kick, but he wouldn`t be able to discourage Jake from working his way in and pounding his body to shreds.

It is almost impossible to keep fighters like LaMotta at a distance because they are the type of rare fighters who will take your best shots, shrug them off, and still keep pressing forward.How can you keep fighters that take your best shots at distance? The hit but don`t be hit model of boxing does not apply to these warriors, at some point you will have to stand your ground and trade.

You have to outbrawl them over the distance, even if your outboxing them in spurts. Hearns will give angles and box, but LaMotta won`t allow it for too long. Even Sugar Ray Robinson, a better boxer than Tommy and far more durable had to fight large portions of their bouts on the inside because Jake took his jabs, right crosses and left hooks and came in anyway and pounded on his ribs to slow him down and make him more stationary as the fight wore on.

If boxing history has shown us one thing, it is that if you are willing and able to take the punishment, you can get inside on anybody (look at Frazier, Basilio, etc). I see LaMotta using the same approach that Hagler did when he fought Tommy, bore your way in at all costs and take the best right hands Tommy will throw your way to break him down mentally and physically.

Work over Hearns` ribs when in close quarters to weaken those twig legs of his and make him more stationary, and once his legs have tired and he has slowed down considerably, start going upstairs with more regularity. Tommy was nowhere near durable enough to last in a dogfight with someone as tough and physically strong as Jake. LaMotta would get inside on him one way or another, and he would rough him up in close and sap his strenght with his mauling tactics and bodyblows.

If the fight is scheduled for ten rounds, I think Tommy can get the nod although he might be holding for dear life towards the end... but in a twelve or fifteen rounder he gets stopped. I loved Tommy and have great respect for him and his abilitys and always enjpyed watching him in action, but Jake is just too strong, too tough and too relentless for Tommy to handle. Skilled fighters who could take what Tommy could dish out and keep pressing him will always pose a lot problems for him and likely stop him inside the distance.

LaMotta KO13 Hearns

Exactly how I see it, but expressed much better than I could have.

[MRBILL]

LaMotta was strong and very bullish in the ring, but he wasn't as technically skilled or diverse as Hagler was in the 1980s... So therefore I can picture Hearns using the ring to his advantage and snapping his whipping jab down at LaMotta, and doing the type of things he was suppose to do against Hagler in 1985...

This is another thriller match, but I feel the '85 / '86 Hearns prevails here against the 1950 LaMotta.... STILL! LaMotta has a chance though....

MR.BILL

[bck620]

Only hope Tommy has is a doctor stoppage to a bloody gash above his left eye by a right hand.... barring that, Jake would stop him due to the bodywork.

[MRBILL]

Only hope Tommy has is a doctor stoppage to a bloody gash above his left eye by a right hand.... barring that, Jake would stop him due to the bodywork.


Hmmm... That depends on the state of Hearns' leg strength.... If Hearns has his legs under him and is in a spry mood, I can see Hearns circling and sticking LaMotta all fight long while utilizing every inch of the ring...

MR.BILL:deal:bbb

[turpinr]

Hmmm... That depends on the state of Hearns' leg strength.... If Hearns has his legs under him and is in a spry mood, I can see Hearns circling and sticking LaMotta all fight long while utilizing every inch of the ring...

MR.BILL:deal:bbbi agree there.i think tommy could stick and move the light punching lamotta.tommy might hurt his hands though