Primo Carnera record

[Thunder and Lightning]

Everybody pretty much rates Carnera in the bottom of the barrell of heaviweight Champions and rarely is he defended and i just wonder if the idea is that all of his big wins were dives.
I mean he holds wins over Levinsky, Lasky, Sharkey, Laughran, Uszcudun, Schaaf, Neusel and Stribling (by DQ) to name some, not a bad record at all but then again were all of them simply ”mobhits”?
If not, were would you rank him if lets just say all his fights were legit?

[DrDuke]

Carnera was decent, but he had never demonstrated anything special skill-wise. He had probably emerged on the higher level due to his size, which he hadn't used as much as it had been possible. Perhaps before him only Marvin Hart was worse, than him. And after him, until the 80s, only Lee Savold, Ernie Terrell and Leon Spinks.

[BoxBuzz]

It's hard to know the full truth here, and it may be that he was truly better than the worst of the doubters give him credit for. It's just a very difficult career to fairly assess because of the unknown extent of the tampering. And I don't think he would doubt his own win over Sharkey, and the punch was legit. I'm am a believer that Jack took an honorable dive by "allowing" a nearly genuine KO to take place. But that's just my take. And the take of many others. (And that would not be on Primo if that is the case.) I never discount the fact that there are just as many, if not more that think that win was legit. I also think that's his biggest win on paper. He was never described by his opponents as a big hitter, and many have assessed his jab to be somewhat authoritative, based on his size......like Valuev in the more current era.

I don't mean to be mean spirited or disrespect the man, but what the mob did was rob him of any certainty of his legacy. Not fair to Primo, but it's history that must be taken at face value for the manner in which it was compromised.

[HomicideHenry]

I'll say it a million times... No manufactured fighter could go 11 brutal rounds with Max Baer... He was nowhere near the fake that he's made out to be... The corruption came prior to his coming to America, when he was still largely an unknown fighter... These were done, far as I understand it, to build up his confidence (as well as to make $$$$) because the Italian giant was not the emotionally strongest man they encountered.

All of his American fights, though, were legitimate. Primarily because they'd find either the smallest available Heavyweights or the most limited or the most shop worn. If he was matched against "the real deals" they were light punching individuals who'd cause him no harm anyways. He was still in development, despite 50-60 matches under his belt.

By the time he met Sharkey for the second time, he was legitimate. Not the best boxer, best puncher, etc but he was at the right place and right time against one of boxings biggest flakes. So it was a certainty that he'd win.

[bwu]

The Loughran fight is the one that has always bothered me. When I was young, I accepted the story that Carnera was propped up by the mob. In Peter Heller's "In This Corner..." Loughran claimed that the only way he could win the title was by knockout.

I was fortunate enough to read some newspaper articles from the aftermath of the fight (this was pre-internet). I've studied further and never seen anything, before or since, that indicates the fight was fixed or that Loughran deserved the decision.

Loughran may not have had a punch and he was not in his prime. But he was an all time great and had some decent work left in him. Carnera won; he deserves some credit.

[Ambling Alp II]

Agreed. He is possibly the only really big heavyweight to ever beat a great fighter under 200, when he beat Loughran. He had to have some skill to do that.
Of course he had weaknesses; he was easy to hit, didn't have the greatest chin, was slow etc.
However, he had a decent jab, some power, a good workrate for his size. He also was much tougher than some people realize.

He was lucky he landed the big shot on Sharkey; however he had to have some power to do it.

Historically, most real heavyweight champions were better than him. He was arguably better than Hart, Willard, Braddock, and Leon Spinks.

[scorpio83]

Primo Carnera could have been a great heavyweight champion if he had the right management and trainer to make him a big threat to any fighters in the 1930s, but unfortunately he was in the wrong time of being influenced by the mob.

[Tuan_Jim]

Carnera was decent, but he had never demonstrated anything special skill-wise. He had probably emerged on the higher level due to his size, which he hadn't used as much as it had been possible. Perhaps before him only Marvin Hart was worse, than him. And after him, until the 80s, only Lee Savold, Ernie Terrell and Leon Spinks.

Never heard anyone take Savold's claim seriously. Shouls he really be mentioned in the context of champions? Does that mean Joe Louis was actually a 2-time champ?

[DrDuke]

Carnera was decent, but he had never demonstrated anything special skill-wise. He had probably emerged on the higher level due to his size, which he hadn't used as much as it had been possible. Perhaps before him only Marvin Hart was worse, than him. And after him, until the 80s, only Lee Savold, Ernie Terrell and Leon Spinks.

Never heard anyone take Savold's claim seriously. Shouls he really be mentioned in the context of champions? Does that mean Joe Louis was actually a 2-time champ?

Well, yes, Savold had a kinda deficient recognition.

[APerno]

I just want to add that in the end Primo did OK - he became a wrestler (and while we snear [me included]) at professional wrestling it treated Carnera well, better than the fight game ever did. In the end he made money, had fans, and generally got to live a good exciting life.

I am surprised Kalan isn't chiming in here; he challenged me to take a second look at Carnera as a boxer and he was right, Primo was a better boxer than legend has it.