BoxRec

pundit wrote:
Schmeling was totally overwhelmed in the refight, even before the kidney punch. He tried to land his hard right but couldn't.

Btw, many tried to overwhelm Schmeling in the early rounds, including Sharkey in 1930. Noone could, for that Schmeling was defensively too strong. Except Louis.

Yes...he was overwhelmed...but not only by Joe Louis but by the whole situation and the circumstances of that fight.

That Louis could do that in this 1938 fight is true.... but no evidence that he would have done it in 1935, 1937 or 1939 ....or in Germany or somwhere else in Europe....

In 1939 A.Heuser wanted to use Louis tactics against Max for the European Heavyweight Title....only to be kayoed after 60 seconds with one punch. ;) That doesn't mean that I would favorite Max in a third fight...but at least I think he would not have received such a bad beating as in 1938. I heard Louis vs Schmeling III was planned by their Managers, but WW II made it impossible. anyway....the more on going Time would've favoured Louis more I guess.

Friedie wrote:

pundit wrote:
Schmeling was totally overwhelmed in the refight, even before the kidney punch. He tried to land his hard right but couldn't.

Btw, many tried to overwhelm Schmeling in the early rounds, including Sharkey in 1930. Noone could, for that Schmeling was defensively too strong. Except Louis.

Yes...he was overwhelmed...but not only by Joe Louis but by the whole situation and the circumstances of that fight.

That Louis could do that in this 1938 fight is true.... but no evidence that he would have done it in 1935, 1937 or 1939 ....or in Germany or somwhere else in Europe....

In 1939 A.Heuser wanted to use Louis tactics against Max for the European Heavyweight Title....only to be kayoed after 60 seconds with one punch. ;) That doesn't mean that I would favorite Max in a third fight...but at least I think he would not have received such a bad beating as in 1938. I heard Louis vs Schmeling III was planned by their Managers, but WW II made it impossible. anyway....the more on going Time would've favoured Louis more I guess.

Heuser isn't quite Louis, wouldn't you say?
The Heuser fight proves that Schmeling wasn't shot in 1938/39, but no more than that.

pundit wrote:
Heuser isn't quite Louis, wouldn't you say?

No sure he's not. But the Schmeling of that Heuser fight wasn't quite the Schmeling of the 38' Louis fight too, wouldn't you say ?

Friedie wrote:

pundit wrote:
Heuser isn't quite Louis, wouldn't you say?

No sure he's not. But the Schmeling of that Heuser fight wasn't quite the Schmeling of the 38' Louis fight too, wouldn't you say ?

He was a year older and suffered from permanent back pains due to Louis' kidney punch. But was still good enough to take Heuser out with his trademark punch - a short, sharp right.

That Louis could do that in this 1938 fight is true.... but no evidence that he would have done it in 1935, 1937 or 1939 ....or in Germany or somwhere else in Europe....

there was no difference between a 1936 schmeling and a 1938 schmeling. same fighter. its just that the 1938 joe louis was a whole different machine than the 1936 joe louis. i think schmeling was near his peak when he fought louis both times.

Decagon wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

That Louis could do that in this 1938 fight is true.... but no evidence that he would have done it in 1935, 1937 or 1939 ....or in Germany or somwhere else in Europe....

there was no difference between a 1936 schmeling and a 1938 schmeling. same fighter. its just that the 1938 joe louis was a whole different machine than the 1936 joe louis. i think schmeling was near his peak when he fought louis both times.

Lack of evidence against your point does not constitute proof of your point. Show why Schmeling was the same fighter in 1938 as he was in 1936.

show why he wasnt the same fighter in 1938 as he was in 1936??? then ill respond with counters

It seems to me that Schmeling's prime was from 1929-1939. He had ups and downs early in that period, in the middle of that period and late in that period.

As for Schmeling-Sharkey, it's too bad that they didn't have a 3rd fight since the first two were controversial.
However, you have to give the edge as to who had the better career to Schmeling. He had the big win over Louis and lost less often to lesser fighters than Sharkey did.

Ambling Alp wrote:It seems to me that Schmeling's prime was from 1929-1939. He had ups and downs early in that period, in the middle of that period and late in that period.

As for Schmeling-Sharkey, it's too bad that they didn't have a 3rd fight since the first two were controversial.

Yes I think you're right...probably there was one "off year" when Schmeling lost to Baer and Hamas in 1933/34. The Max who kayoed Hamas one year later with ease was not the same. as for Sharkey the first fight went to short to drew a conclusion but in the second fight Max was the far better fighter and Sharkey was lucky not to get knocked out in the late rounds. But was Sharkey still in his prime in 1932 ? hard to say. I think Sharkey have had great potential but made less of it. Max have had the more spectacular wins I guess (e.g. Risko, Stribling, Walker, Louis).