Well, I guess we will never really know, but what do you guys think? The papers back then were divided. It really did kind of look like Jack was exagerating the blow. Carnera did not hit that hard.
Also Jack won an easy decision in their first fight.
I respect your opinions and would like to hear them.
P.S.see Carnera vs. Willard (I did not ask if you thought Johson took a dive against WIllard as I think he did not and it is not in question).
Primo vs. Sharkey a fix?
-
Tomato-Can
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 656
- Joined: 28 Dec 2001, 20:00
I've written about this in another thread or two, and there is no doubt in my mind that Sharkey tanked it.Went down from an uppercut from Carnera's wrist. If you can find a tape or film you'll see how Sharkey kept trying to manuever himself into getting hit with anything that looked lilke a punch. Carnera's handlers were owned by Owney Maddon and Johnny Buckley's crew on the Sharkey side were notorious .
Carnera never showed that kind of power in the middle of the ring. By that I mean if he got a man cornered he could club him with those ponderous hands.... but the guy would have to make an appointment to meet him in the corner for that to happen.
Carnera never showed that kind of power in the middle of the ring. By that I mean if he got a man cornered he could club him with those ponderous hands.... but the guy would have to make an appointment to meet him in the corner for that to happen.
-
Tomato-Can
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 656
- Joined: 28 Dec 2001, 20:00
terap wrote:Tomato Peel can stink up any thread.
What is your purpose, Tomato?
Personal animosity?
Is that the best you can do?
You are souring the very website you are an "editor" (?) of.
Joe Holman knew more about boxing than you multiplied 10,000 times could ever hope to.
Spit and sneer. That is your offering.
The purpose of my offering was to point out that just because someone does'nt admit to something does not mean that it is not true. Spit and Sneer? Yes I suppose so. Have you also done some Spit and Sneer? I"ll leave the answer to you. Or should I bring up your response to SimonPure's post about the Richard Steele that he knew?
That was certainly an example of "Spit and Sneer" I would not want to try to match. Would you like me to point out some other examples? I find it interesting that you can dish out sarcasm yet are so sensative when it is returned.
-
Irishlad69
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 57
- Joined: 09 Mar 2003, 22:04
Im not so sure it was a fix? Canera [although behind on points at the time of the KO], seemed to be countering well, and checking sharkey's attacks with well-timed left uppercuts, and jack has great diffulty getting inside. When primo was able to marry timing with overwhelming body weight, he could be genuinely dangerous!
I think he tanked it. Gangters were at both training camps. Carnera could KO the heavyweight champion of the world with one punch, but coud not hurt lightheavyweights in sparring?
I have read articles of Carnera in sparring unable to faze men half his size.
I guess we will never know for sure. A topic we can argue for ever.
I have read articles of Carnera in sparring unable to faze men half his size.
I guess we will never know for sure. A topic we can argue for ever.
a study of two posters re: Sharkey/Carnera
It's my opinion that Sharkey tanked it. Irishlad responds with a different view, but backs it up with sensible arguments, interpreting a fight we have both seen (on film/tape) and studied and draws a different but reasonable conclusion. No accusing me or others who agree with me of having any kind of personal agenda or speaking ill of the long deceased.
Terap, on the other hand, just comes back and accuses those (specifcally Tomato Can,) who also think it was a dive, of smearing (smearing who?)and makes a personal attack instead of adding more data to his own opinion, or just saying he disagrees and letting it go at that.
No further comment.
It's my opinion that Sharkey tanked it. Irishlad responds with a different view, but backs it up with sensible arguments, interpreting a fight we have both seen (on film/tape) and studied and draws a different but reasonable conclusion. No accusing me or others who agree with me of having any kind of personal agenda or speaking ill of the long deceased.
Terap, on the other hand, just comes back and accuses those (specifcally Tomato Can,) who also think it was a dive, of smearing (smearing who?)and makes a personal attack instead of adding more data to his own opinion, or just saying he disagrees and letting it go at that.
No further comment.
It was a fix IMO.
Sharkey got hit with a light punch and went down on his face like he was unconscious. He didn't even move. And Primo is a guy who went 15 rounds with an aging Tommy Loughran, outweighed him by nearly 100 pounds (literally!), and couldn't even knock him down! (or even hurt him all that much). Sharkey and Primo both had mob connections and before the fight both of their camps were crawling with mobsters. All signs before the fight said something suspicious was gonna happen. And Sharkey was known to give less than his best efforts in other fights.
BTW, Sharkey also won the title on a highly controversial decision. A lot of people wonder how someone could throw away their title like that, but if it wasn't for the "Powers That Be", Sharkey might never have been a champ in the first place.
Sharkey got hit with a light punch and went down on his face like he was unconscious. He didn't even move. And Primo is a guy who went 15 rounds with an aging Tommy Loughran, outweighed him by nearly 100 pounds (literally!), and couldn't even knock him down! (or even hurt him all that much). Sharkey and Primo both had mob connections and before the fight both of their camps were crawling with mobsters. All signs before the fight said something suspicious was gonna happen. And Sharkey was known to give less than his best efforts in other fights.
BTW, Sharkey also won the title on a highly controversial decision. A lot of people wonder how someone could throw away their title like that, but if it wasn't for the "Powers That Be", Sharkey might never have been a champ in the first place.
-
Irishlad69
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 57
- Joined: 09 Mar 2003, 22:04
Yeah, but in the instance of tommy loughran, you have a much smaller fighter, but an exceptional one! Loughran was totally outboxing sharkey in their first fight, before getting caught by a fortunate punch. In their second encounter, tommy outclassed jack, even knocking him down in the tenth. The punch carnera caught sharkey with was an ugly, but effective shot, which caught the weeping warrior on the cusp of the chin, and swept his entire body upwards.
flex...I think you're confusing Sharkey with Ernie Schaff. Ernie is the one who died in his match with Carnera, probably from previous injuries. Sharkey lived well into old age.
You may be thinking of the movie The Harder They Fall, in which Pat Comisky played a part that was partially based on both Sharkey and Shaaff.
You may be thinking of the movie The Harder They Fall, in which Pat Comisky played a part that was partially based on both Sharkey and Shaaff.
I have read about his own handlers talking about how he could not punch. He could not hurt any one in sparring. Carnera was big but that does not make him a big puncher.
Sharkey was hit with a punch and acted like he was shot. I have seen it a bunch of times and still think it was a fix. Carnera was a fraud who had size, strength, and a lot of heart, but not much in boxing ability, chin or punch.
He is a fasinating story and the biggest heavyweight champion of all-time so some still want to believe the hype. It was well documented it was only hype.
They put him in with Tommy in his first defense because they had not the money to fix his first defense so they found a small guy who could not punch.
Tommy could not KO light heavyweights, and was sooooo much smaller. It was the perfect fight. Still Carnera was exposed as not having any punch and was in a very tough fight with a guy he should have killed if the hype was true.
When he got in the ring with Baer he was dropped with the first punch he took (possibly one of the first he took for real from a real contender most believed). He would get dropped every time he was hit solid, but he had heart as big as his frame.
The fight was a fix in my opinion. I always thought this much and I guess I always will. Good boxing talk though, one of those arguments with guys on both sides that will never be able to prove the other wrong.
Sharkey was hit with a punch and acted like he was shot. I have seen it a bunch of times and still think it was a fix. Carnera was a fraud who had size, strength, and a lot of heart, but not much in boxing ability, chin or punch.
He is a fasinating story and the biggest heavyweight champion of all-time so some still want to believe the hype. It was well documented it was only hype.
They put him in with Tommy in his first defense because they had not the money to fix his first defense so they found a small guy who could not punch.
Tommy could not KO light heavyweights, and was sooooo much smaller. It was the perfect fight. Still Carnera was exposed as not having any punch and was in a very tough fight with a guy he should have killed if the hype was true.
When he got in the ring with Baer he was dropped with the first punch he took (possibly one of the first he took for real from a real contender most believed). He would get dropped every time he was hit solid, but he had heart as big as his frame.
The fight was a fix in my opinion. I always thought this much and I guess I always will. Good boxing talk though, one of those arguments with guys on both sides that will never be able to prove the other wrong.
I interviewed Jack Sharkey in his nursing home not too long before he died.
Jack told me, and I quote:
"Carnera couldn't have hit me in the ass with a handful of tacks if I didn't want him to."
What do I think? I've watched the films, as have most of the posters here. I spoke to Sharkey, and others at the fight.
My conclusion -- I dont know.
PS -- Sharkey apparently handwrote his life story including his take on the Carnera bout -- Sharkey's family ahs not released that manuscript.
Jack told me, and I quote:
"Carnera couldn't have hit me in the ass with a handful of tacks if I didn't want him to."
What do I think? I've watched the films, as have most of the posters here. I spoke to Sharkey, and others at the fight.
My conclusion -- I dont know.
PS -- Sharkey apparently handwrote his life story including his take on the Carnera bout -- Sharkey's family ahs not released that manuscript.
Re: sharkey-schmeling II
terap wrote:Hawk,
I have to disagree with you on the second Sharkey-Schmeling fight.
Sharkey (a master boxer) totally negated and frustrated Schmeling in that fight.
Sharkey stood 2 inches out side of Schmeling's punching range--and from there he jabbed (always at the right moment) to mess up Schmeling's ability to get set to get off a heavy punch.
Sharkey also mixed in just enough heavier right hands, tied up Schmeling perfectly when he wanted to, and most of all moved and placed himself so that Schmeling was never able to get off the hard shots he was so eager to deliver. Schmeling was totally frustrated and the fight was over.
And he had lost his title on a near shutout.
I watch my tape of that fight periodically with the greatest pleasure--
and consider Sharkey's performance there one of the most perfectly fought fights I have seen.
(Along with Braddock's outpointing of Baer for the title, and Fullmer's first win over Sugar Ray Robinson).
Sharkey's performance in winning the title from Schmeling is only for those who appreciate the technical side of boxing---
but endlessly valuable for things which can be learned about
---controlling the distance between you and your opponent,
---jabbing at just the right time to mess up your opponent's balance and ability to get off the punches he wants to,
---tying up an opponent completely on the inside,
--- and most of all--mixing up what you are doing so that nothing is predictable at any one moment.
Sharkey's performance in that fight was a masterpiece.
Max deserved to win. He made the fight and threw more and harder punches (I have the video at home too). Sharkey was defensiv the whole fight....as challenger !!
The reusult was a remarkless face of Max.....while Sharkey hiding his swolen face under a big towel.
The reaction of the (american !) crowd at the fight was another sign, that Joe Jacobs was RIGHT with his famous words....."We wuz robbed...."
8)
terap wrote:Sharkey landed repeatedly with his left jab and some right hands--in every round.
Schmeling threw few punches and landed next to nothing.
You can't win a fight if you land nothing while your opponent hits you steadily.
(Unless you are Ali fighting Jimmy Young).
...so it's a miracle that Max was unmarked and Sharkey looked so badly beaten after the fight....
:P
Sharkey was very lucky not to be knocked out in the 15th.....
there isn't anything to add to the discussion of the Sharkey/Carnera title fight, but here's something interesting about their first one, which was fought in Ebbets Field. In a middle round, Sharkey knocked Carnera down with a good right hand. Reports say the referee's count was as long as some of Liz Taylor's marriages. Ah one...ah two.....When the ref finally got to "nine' he made it a three syllable word and Carnera got to his feet but was still wobbly. Baths have been taken in less time than it took to wipe off his gloves. The tempermental Sharkey was so outraged he that he actually tried to dive through the ropes and get out but his manager Johnny Buckley was a big big fat guy and he knew his fighter and he climbed up on the apron and pushed Sharkey back, saving him from a disqualification and allowing him to go on to win the decision.
The best write up I recall of this was by Ted Carroll, in a Ring Magazine many years ago.
The best write up I recall of this was by Ted Carroll, in a Ring Magazine many years ago.
Very well writen post thanks for the compliment, 6 pack. I appreciate it. Not a sports writer as such...just a writer. Over the years I've written in a big variety of fields...mostly humor, fiction and essay type things. The only sport I've ever written about is boxing. Nothing in print any more, although this forum has my juices flowing again.
I do enjoy passing along information I've gathered over the years and try to do it in an interesting manner. Nice to know that occasioanlly I succede.
I do enjoy passing along information I've gathered over the years and try to do it in an interesting manner. Nice to know that occasioanlly I succede.
hello...I am the person who usually read's the person who signs in as Jaclem and corrects his spelling before it goes out anywhere. Unfortunately, he enters his posts in this venue directly, so so you will from time to time see writing such as in the previous entry.
I'm glad he writes under this pen name, as many editors are aware of my responsibilities.
This is just in case one of them knows the name behind the pen name.
Thank you.
The Human Spellcheck.
I'm glad he writes under this pen name, as many editors are aware of my responsibilities.
This is just in case one of them knows the name behind the pen name.
Thank you.
The Human Spellcheck.