BoxRec

Overall though, (at heavyweight) do you rate Schmeling higher?

suppose Gene Tunney did not retire in 1928
and fought up until 1930.
How do you think Max Schmeling would have done against him ?

Just my opinion, but in three bouts, I believe that Floyd wins two of them. Patterson was KO'd twice by Sonny Liston, but Sonny was a monster. I think he would have knocked out Schmeling too.

Patterson was underrated. As far as Floyd ducking the best when he was champion, that was his manager, Cus D'Amato's decision, not his.

Caractacus wrote: ↑18 Dec 2021, 18:20 suppose Gene Tunney did not retire in 1928
and fought up until 1930.
How do you think Max Schmeling would have done against him ?

Tunney would win.

Billy Tully wrote: ↑14 Dec 2021, 13:04

cfang wrote: ↑14 Dec 2021, 13:02 Had a look at their records and it’s not even close. Pattersons record is far superior. Schmelings record doesn’t have many good wins. Apart from the obvious he has the foul win over sharkey who he lost to and then stribling and a bunch of ok euro heavies and that’s it.

Patterson post Liston fights had some great results against quarry, chuvalo, machine, bonavena. His career much more impressive.

I stopped reading at "had a look at their records".

Well you have to don't you? Unless you remember every single Schmeling fight (70) he had and saw all of them on film perhaps? I can recall from memory max's 2 fights with louis, the 2 sharkey fights, the loss to baer, the win over walker (all these seen on film or at least highlights), an early loss to a British heavy called gypsey daniels and also some fights with walter neusal post war perhaps. So i wanted to go through his record more carefully and see if there were any major results i missed. There weren't any really other than a couple of wins over the rock like but limited uzcudun,

Pattersons record i pretty much knew obviously but wanted to check a couple of results,

Kind of a toss up fight. Both had their tremendous strengths. Both could punch well. Patterson was faster and a better combination puncher, but less durable. Schmeling had a stand up style, was more mechanical, but he was also a great strategist. Both were somewhat inconsistent. Two classy gentlemen who represented their chosen profession well.

In My computer Simulator i made. This is created to find boxer's true potential. As many fighter's were not tested in manner's we would of liked in reality.

I attempt to find the boxer's peer (from a different era) whom they match up with the most closely.

These two are separated by several spots.

Floyd's peer would be Joe Walcott. He's close to him.

In simulation's Floyd would be hitting the deck too often to come out ahead of Schmeling in a series. He was capable of a win but would not dominate Max schmeling.


Max Schemling had a very very close peer in Gene Tunney.
Fight 1: Schmeling Ws15 (split)
Fight 2: Draw
Fight 3 Schmeling Ws15 (split)

Schmeling is ranked 4 spots above Floyd & Walcott.

These are tournaments of pre- Ali era.

The Computer simulation states that Schmeling's true prime is far exceeding that of Jack Sharkey whom rates just behind a Walcott. Scmeling does not nearly have the separation (in greatness) from Louis as people would think.

Whether Schmeling ever hit his prime is an interesting topic. As he clearly beat a generational heavyweight in Joe Louis near that boxer's prime. So despite his failure's he still achieved more than most boxer's did and data would show he is better than Gene Tunney. Despite a confusing career arc. It is of my belief he was not nearly the same fighter when he meet Joe Louis the second time and data would support that past his prime (by the obvious blowout) and that he was a much more difficult opponent than his performance suggested.

Schmeling combined enough power and chin to not be effected by Tunney's or Floyd or Walcott's or Sharkey's Raw power.

Obviously these are just simulation's but it's still interesting data. I appreciate an analytics approach to the subject.