BoxRec

Carnera was the biggest Heavyweight champion up until Valuev took the crown away just a few months before...many criticise Valuev as being nothing more than a sideshow freak posing as a fighter.

Carnera was considered a goon, a man with no skills, who used his size solely against much smaller men to exaggerate his height and wear down his opponents.

Judging solely on these mens two records and physical attributes, my guess is that Carnera would edge Valuev on decision.

But even my own guess another giant, Jess Willard, would have beaten both these men, despite Willard being rather old for a fighter.

One of the few things over-looked in Willard's forte of boxing, was that he was at one time one of the division's most feared body punchers, which is something both Carnera and Valuev seem to lack.

Carnera had a good punch. Carnera KO 4.

Yea but you have to take this in mind:

1.) Carnera usually faced men much smaller than himself

This benefited himself not just in publicity as the Italian Giant, but most smaller men couldnt get passed his reach, so it be easy for Carnera to break em down. I am sure alot of very small men gave up out of frustration or did many stupid things when they fought Carnera, cus they could never hit him real good due to his reach.

2.) How many were fixed?

Carnera did alot of tank town tours, facing guys who were clubfighters, and the Sharkey fight is considered possibly a dive.

3.) Most were unknowns

Look at his record, half these guys prolly never left their own state fighting, and most were known losers, or where guys who were decent and good but never could get to the next level.

4.) Was it really his punch or his weight?

Imagine yourself facing a man 50 to 70 pounds or more heavier than yourself, and he leans on you and hits ya with about 270 pounds behind his punches...and there is 10-12-15 3 min rounds in the contest. Was it so much the punch or the sheer exhaustion these men felt?

carnera is underated. he looks better on film than willard.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:carnera is underated. he looks better on film than willard.

Willard is one goofy bastard.

I could KO Willard or atleast outbox him.

Maybe so...but it was those body shots that dropped and ended Johnson's reign...it was those punches that killed a man in the ring...Willard may have been goofy on film, but I am sure the farm boy from Kansas hit like a ton of bricks when landing a blow solidly.

IrishRufusMurphy wrote:1.) Carnera usually faced men much smaller than himself

Yes, this is true, but he also faced a fair number of very large opponents as well. For some reason there was a good number of over sized HW's in the early 30's. They weren't particularly good, but some had decent records.

I think for these two guys it would most appropriate if they were each issued a big barrel to wear, painted there faces with clown makeup and then release a bull into the ring with them and see how that works out. It would be better than asking either of them to fight. It would also be more interesting and entertaining.

..technical draw after foure rounds..neither man lands a punch against the other and referee mills lane throws them out.


Willard at 6'6" 1/4 and carnera at 6'5"3/4 still hold the tallest and second tallest as they were undisputed champions...linear or whatever. valuev's title is strictly a paper one.

I'm not sure of lennox lewis's height as it changed from fight to fight, even though he seemed a bit old to be a growing boy.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:carnera is underated. he looks better on film than willard.

So it is. Btw, Carnera-Sharkey was certainly not fixed (Sharkey's head snaps back wildly after the , neither was Carnera-Schaaf, and neither Carnera-Uzcudun. And this suffices assuring him far higher status than Valuev.