BoxRec

- 9 fighters had beat Sharkey before Carnera knocked him cold. It was Sharkey's first defense of his title he lifted off Schmeling, so the question arises, was Sharkey ever at his best?

This is a complete non-sequitur. Sharkey was a reknowned for his inconsistency, looking great sometimes, terrible others. Of course, this kind of inconsistency in this particular era obviously suggests corruption, but that's another topic. As to when Sharkey was at his best, though, his fights with Harry Wills, George Godfrey, Max Schmeling (both), Tommy Loughran (1st), Jack Delaney, and Jack Dempsey are the ones to which I would point.

Same deal with Godfrey who has a string of notable DQ losses for low blows before Primo. Tapes of Sharkey and Godfrey are clear with Sharkey blasted into Oz and Godfrey spoiling every second of every minute by holding, butting rabbit punching, low blows, hitting on the break, doing everything under the sun to avoid Carnera boxing his ears off.

Not sure I understand where you're going with this. I never said either Sharkey or Godfrey was unbeaten or unbeatable. Compared with Carnera, though, I think both come out ahead. Sharkey beat Carnera easily in the 1st fight and won the first the 5 rounds of the rematch before falling over from that phantom uppercut, thrown from the wrong foot and well out of position. As to Godfrey, you're the first person I have ever encountered who thought he was giving it 100% against Da Preem. As for his best fights, look to the ones he had against Tiger Jack Fox, Larry Gains (both, despite the LDQ in the rematch), Paolino Uzcuden, maybe the Sharkey fight even though he lost it, Fred Fulton, Jimmy Maloney.

While you're searching the heavens for the best Sharkey and Godfrey there ever was,

Not a terribly difficult endeavor, as it turned out.

perhaps you can refer us to the boxing universe where fighters always meet each other at their best. I definitely want to hop a freighter, railcar, swim a river, do whatever it takes to smuggle myself into that universe. Presumably all the tree trunks also have beer taps with hamburgers and BBQ hanging from low laying branches, beautiful women flocking in droves with everything being always hunky dory glorious.

What are you talking about? When discussing hypothetical match-ups and all-time rankings of this sort the universe is the imagination, as you well know. But let me be perfectly clear in case there's been a misunderstanding: Joe Louis is never going to fight Muhammad Ali in any universe short of Heaven, nor are the pre-Louis heavyweights going to get together for a box-off to determine how they should be rated, so if that's what you're looking for, then you better stop participating in these kinds of discussions.

Mr E wrote:

- 9 fighters had beat Sharkey before Carnera knocked him cold. It was Sharkey's first defense of his title he lifted off Schmeling, so the question arises, was Sharkey ever at his best?

This is a complete non-sequitur. Sharkey was a reknowned for his inconsistency, looking great sometimes, terrible others. Of course, this kind of inconsistency in this particular era obviously suggests corruption, but that's another topic. As to when Sharkey was at his best, though, his fights with Harry Wills, George Godfrey, Max Schmeling (both), Tommy Loughran (1st), Jack Delaney, and Jack Dempsey are the ones to which I would point.

Same deal with Godfrey who has a string of notable DQ losses for low blows before Primo. Tapes of Sharkey and Godfrey are clear with Sharkey blasted into Oz and Godfrey spoiling every second of every minute by holding, butting rabbit punching, low blows, hitting on the break, doing everything under the sun to avoid Carnera boxing his ears off.

Not sure I understand where you're going with this. I never said either Sharkey or Godfrey was unbeaten or unbeatable. Compared with Carnera, though, I think both come out ahead. Sharkey beat Carnera easily in the 1st fight and won the first the 5 rounds of the rematch before falling over from that phantom uppercut, thrown from the wrong foot and well out of position. As to Godfrey, you're the first person I have ever encountered who thought he was giving it 100% against Da Preem. As for his best fights, look to the ones he had against Tiger Jack Fox, Larry Gains (both, despite the LDQ in the rematch), Paolino Uzcuden, maybe the Sharkey fight even though he lost it, Fred Fulton, Jimmy Maloney.

- Ignoring unproven claims of corruption which have dogged boxing from it's inception, indeed all sports, could you kindly post the Sharkey footage of Harry Wills, George Godfrey, Tommy Loughran (1st), and Jack Delaney on youtube for us?

His form is certainly no "better" than that of Schmeling and Dempsey absolutely gutted him starting in round 1 regardless of any dubious scoring some claim have that nobody else has ever seen. Was that also a tank job? Preem's "phantom uppercut" 100% more graphic and feature distorting than Ali's phantom soapbubble pop on Liston. Was Preem in the tank in the first fight? Makes much more sense in light of the rematch.

Speaking of, also a youtube request for the first Preem fight for Sharkey, and for Godfrey, the Fox fight, Gain's fights, Uzcuden, Fulton, Maloney, and of course, just a reminder, Sharkey. No doubt, once I see the graphic evidence, surely that's enough to change my mind over the poor graphic form he shows in the Primo rematch, Dempsey, and Louis. He did hold his own against Schmeling and Walker, but hardly confers unbeatability to him against Primo.

'Pologize for all the requests, but consider that you could be a youtube hero to future gens who could see the "best" Sharkey there ever was!

....holy crap BRR....are you about to tout "Carnera's skills" for us? YIPES!!!

"O heavy lightness! Serious vanity!
Mis-shapen chaos of well-seeming forms!
Feather of lead, bright smoke, cold fire, sick health!"

BoxBuzz wrote:....holy crap BRR....are you about to tout "Carnera's skills" for us? YIPES!!!

"O heavy lightness! Serious vanity!
Mis-shapen chaos of well-seeming forms!
Feather of lead, bright smoke, cold fire, sick health!"

Buzz, the ignore button can be a blessing, if you let it . . .

BoxBuzz wrote:....holy crap BRR....are you about to tout "Carnera's skills" for us? YIPES!!!

- Yikes, I'm gonna tout WIPES for you to clean up all that holy crap you're so ill over.

raylawpc wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:....holy crap BRR....are you about to tout "Carnera's skills" for us? YIPES!!!

"O heavy lightness! Serious vanity!
Mis-shapen chaos of well-seeming forms!
Feather of lead, bright smoke, cold fire, sick health!"

Buzz, the ignore button can be a blessing, if you let it . . .

Yes, it's a last resort but BRR and his ridiculous effeminate tosh are on my ignore list. He's now keeping Elmo & Irene company.

.

- Ignoring unproven claims of corruption which have dogged boxing from it's inception, indeed all sports,

Claims of corruption have dogged sports since their inception because sports have been corrupted since their inception. Are you taking the position that no fights have ever been thrown?

If you take the position that all of Primo Carnera's fights were on the level, then you are in a minority of one and we have very little left to discuss. My view is that that position is absurd.

More fundamentally, though, to close your eyes to past corruption and to exclude it from your historical analysis is, I submit, to fail to analyze at all. When we're dealing with speculation on this kind of level, all we can do is take the best evidence history can offer us and, again, speculate based on that. We are not dealing with questions that can be "proven" one way or the other, correct?

could you kindly post the Sharkey footage of Harry Wills, George Godfrey, Tommy Loughran (1st), and Jack Delaney on youtube for us?

What makes you think it's on youtube?

His form is certainly no "better" than that of Schmeling and Dempsey absolutely gutted him starting in round 1 regardless of any dubious scoring some claim have that nobody else has ever seen. Was that also a tank job?

Sharkey and Schmeling are very close to equal in my view; looks to me as if Sharkey held a slight advantage in their two fights, taken together, but that is a point with respect to which reasonable minds can surely differ. Dempsey beat him fair and square -- never heard any suggestion to the contrary, plus the film is pretty conclusive (as opposed to Sharkey-Carnera II, which people pegged for a fake immediately and with respect to which the film is, at best, inconclusive). But I agree that, in the Dempsey fight, the early rounds were closer than the popular press reported, though I did think Dempsey was behind going into the 7th. No shame in losing to the great Manassa Mauler, however.

Preem's "phantom uppercut" 100% more graphic and feature distorting than Ali's phantom soapbubble pop on Liston. Was Preem in the tank in the first fight? Makes much more sense in light of the rematch.

What's the Ali-Liston fight have to do with anything? Whether that fight was prearranged has nothing whatsoever to do with whether Sharkey-Carnera II was prearranged. Total red herring.

Never heard any suggestion that Primo went into the "tank" in any fight and neither have you.

Speaking of, also a youtube request for the first Preem fight for Sharkey, and for Godfrey, the Fox fight, Gain's fights, Uzcuden, Fulton, Maloney, and of course, just a reminder, Sharkey.
No doubt, once I see the graphic evidence, surely that's enough to change my mind over the poor graphic form he shows in the Primo rematch, Dempsey, and Louis. He did hold his own against Schmeling and Walker, but hardly confers unbeatability to him against Primo. 'Pologize for all the requests, but consider that you could be a youtube hero to future gens who could see the "best" Sharkey there ever was!

[/quote]

Whoa-- when did I ever say anyone was "unbeatable"? And, you thought his form was "poor" against Dempsey, did you? Are you kidding me? As for Sharkey's "form" in the Carnera rematch, how did you score the first 5 rounds?

Again, comparing fighters in their mythical primes involves a lot of speculation. You know it and I know it. We do the best we can, make our best guesses, and offer our opinions for friendly debate. Whether I change your mind holds zero interest to me, though I will continue to respond to your arguments. Bottom line is that my best guess, based on the conclusions I have drawn from the evidence available, is that Sharkey is under-rated and that, at his peak and giving it 100%, he would beat Primo Carnera more often than not. I strongly suspect that the VAST majority of boxing historians/pundits (call them what you like) would agree with me on that point.

As for what film exists of Sharkey at his best, look at the Dempsey and Schmeling fights. If you don't think he looks like a heckuva fighter, then I strongly suspect you have never set foot in a ring yourself.

Seriously, though-- you don't think ANY of Carnera's wins were fixed? Zero????

Mr E wrote: As for what film exists of Sharkey at his best, look at the Dempsey and Schmeling fights. If you don't think he looks like a heckuva fighter, then I strongly suspect you have never set foot in a ring yourself.

Seriously, though-- you don't think ANY of Carnera's wins were fixed? Zero????

- What, you want some ring time with me now, is that the game?

Seriously, that's about what you gents who predominate these boards do, you make up the most nonsensical assertion to attribute to me to easily refute. In the ring, that ain't even a credible feint.

Anyone who accepts Primo's wins were fixed also have to accept that his losses were fixed too. Same deal with Sharkey, so I don't always accept the results of this era or any era as gospel from just the record or pundits of the day. Too often I've seen film of described fights so different as to be night and day. Based on limited video evidence and the current given records, Primo is the superior fighter to Sharkey in most areas.

Now, don't go and make up that I dismiss Sharkey. He was competitive with Walker and Schmeling and maybe Young Stribling as well, but per the record outboxed by Risko in what should be Sharkey at his best.

Primo also has a gamer fighter quality to him, where Sharkey seems to shut down when the trouble arrived. Since Primo's peers are in the HOF, and he holds 3 wins over legit HOFers and a better carrer record than most, surely it must follow that at bare minimum he's in their class.

Bill Tate also underrated as another example. Guy was WAY overmatched early in his career, rode hard and put up wet scenario, finally blossoming as Dempsey's sparring partner. 5-17-1 in 23 fights against period HOFers, that's more HOF fights than 95% in the IBHOF. Unfortunately, video pickin's for Big Bill are slim and poor quality. He gets so little respect that apparently nobody knows or has bothered to post his birth date, which may be perfectly understandable given the poor rural area and era he was born in.

I could go on, but point being that Sharkey generally has a good rating, whereas they are often dismissed out of hand as not counting for anything of note. I like to break down fighter's careers to see what makes them tick, and Primo's record looks a cut above his. Why that upsets people, go figure. You folks make it out to be some kind of Pearl Harbor attack on the status quo.

Me, I'm here to tell you Primo's in the IBHOF, just not yet. And no, fairplay now gents, I'm wise to your games. I never stated Tate is a HOFer. He's underrated though and interesting enough for a bio if he were alive today.

- What, you want some ring time with me now, is that the game?

Ha. That's not what I meant, but if you're ever in L.A. and would like a little friendly sparring, come on over to Rigan Machado's Academy in Redondo Beach. I train in Brazilian jiu-jitsu there 3-4 times a week, but there's room to put on the gloves, which a number of us do fairly regularly. I have an extra set of gloves, but bring your own mouthpiece.

All I meant was that Jack Sharkey's form on several of the films you say you've seen is obviously first-rate, yet you don't see it. That makes me wonder whether you really know what you're looking at.

Seriously, that's about what you gents who predominate these boards do, you make up the most nonsensical assertion to attribute to me to easily refute. In the ring, that ain't even a credible feint.

I don't understand this passage at all. To what does it refer?

Anyone who accepts Primo's wins were fixed also have to accept that his losses were fixed too.

Complete nonsense. Carnera's backers had a financial stake in building him up, not in discrediting him. To the contrary, the fact that many of his wins were fixed makes it LESS likely that his losses were.

Same deal with Sharkey,

????????????????

so I don't always accept the results of this era or any era as gospel from just the record or pundits of the day. Too often I've seen film of described fights so different as to be night and day.

I, too

Based on limited video evidence and the current given records, Primo is the superior fighter to Sharkey in most areas.

I can't imagine how anyone could watch these two guys on film and come away with that conclusion.

Now, don't go and make up that I dismiss Sharkey. He was competitive with Walker and Schmeling and maybe Young Stribling as well, but per the record outboxed by Risko in what should be Sharkey at his best.

By "per the record" you mean he dropped a decision to Johnny Risko? I haven't seen that fight and I haven't read any next-day newspaper accounts of it. I read an after-the-fact summary somewhere that Sharkey showed up unmotivated, which he often did, and appeared not to be giving it his best -- but that he still probably did deserve the nod. Not sure how accurate that is at all. (Maybe ray or one of the other real historians around here could shed some light?) But, hell, Risko was a tough nut and there's no question (certainly not in my mind) that Sharkey was an inconsistent performer-- i.e., a total head case. Sharkey lost several other fights, too, and I never said he was the greatest of all time.

Primo also has a gamer fighter quality to him, where Sharkey seems to shut down when the trouble arrived.

Totally inaccurate. Sharkey shut down when bored-- most of his losses were the result of not throwing enough punches and being outhustled. When pressed, he usually fought pretty well. Carnera was unquestionably a gamer, though-- tough guy, lot of heart, good fighter.

Since Primo's peers are in the HOF, and he holds 3 wins over legit HOFers and a better carrer record than most, surely it must follow that at bare minimum he's in their class.

You need to explain this better. I need to know which wins you are talking about before I can respond.

Bill Tate also underrated as another example. Guy was WAY overmatched early in his career, rode hard and put up wet scenario, finally blossoming as Dempsey's sparring partner. 5-17-1 in 23 fights against period HOFers, that's more HOF fights than 95% in the IBHOF. Unfortunately, video pickin's for Big Bill are slim and poor quality. He gets so little respect that apparently nobody knows or has bothered to post his birth date, which may be perfectly understandable given the poor rural area and era he was born in.

Another example of what? Okay, don't necessarily disagree that Bill Tate was an underrated fighter but what's that got to do with this discussion?

I could go on, but point being that Sharkey generally has a good rating, whereas they are often dismissed out of hand as not counting for anything of note.

????????????

I like to break down fighter's careers to see what makes them tick, and Primo's record looks a cut above his. Why that upsets people, go figure. You folks make it out to be some kind of Pearl Harbor attack on the status quo.

Doesn't upset me at all. If you go back to the start of our exchange, you are the one who started making the snide remarks, not me. I only responded in kind.

But what about Primo's game do you like? He was a big, strong guy. Not terribly quick though not abominably slow either. Good jab when he threw it, not too hard to hit, average puncher, weak chin, good stamina, lot of heart. Good fighter. Not a great but not a bum.

Me, I'm here to tell you Primo's in the IBHOF, just not yet. And no, fairplay now gents, I'm wise to your games. I never stated Tate is a HOFer. He's underrated though and interesting enough for a bio if he were alive today.

Carnera does not belong in the hall of fame.

Benjamin Brain is in the HOF :)

1 Dempsey
2 Tunney
3 Johnson
4 Sullivan
5 Wills
6 Langford
7 Jeffries
8 Burns
9 Sharkey
10 Baer

Sometimes I think the late great Peter Jackson gets a raw deal...

Crease wrote:Sometimes I think the late great Peter Jackson gets a raw deal...

- Jeff Fenech recently voted Australia's greatest ever boxer. Maybe not being born in Australia DQed Tyzsu and Jackson from the competition.

Everything I've read about Jackson speaks to his class as a gentleman and boxer, so he seems to have been highly regarded. His commonwealth title every bit as valid as Sullivan's supposed world title if it was true Sullivan avoided fighting him. Truth be told that they had only a teensy overlap and Sullivan was functionally semiretired.

Now, supposedly he was offered a crack at Corbett's title but didn't like the money, conditions, or venue.

Peter Jackson
Langford
Jack Johnson
Jeannette
Wills
Dempsey
George Godfrey (II)
Larry Gains
Tunney
McVey

hon mention: Jeffries, Frank Childs