Braddock, Baer, Sharkey and Schmeling in IBHOF, but Carnera is not ...

I've been posting my case for Carnera since 2007. With BRS gone, and the proliferation of Primo footage out there, I think he will get in eventually. Even Paul Gallico didn't question the validity of his defense against Loughran, and the entirety of his title winning rematch over Sharkey seems to have convinced viewers that one too was on the level. His first two defenses were against challengers who had defeated the man who dethroned him in his third defense. In less than eight months, he risked the most valuable prize in sports three times, an activity level not seen by a reigning HW Champion since 1909, and wouldn't be seen again until 1938.

He brought the long dormant HW Title out of mothballs, and dusted off the cobwebs. He's the only undisputed HW titleholder prior to Leon Spinks who won that title from a reigning champion who remains yet to be enshrined in Canastota. He deserves to join the giant cast of his fist on display there as an official inductee.

 

Thank you for this view of Primo. I was getting ready to write all the mob tie stuff and fixed fights, but this gave me a new view of him and his reign. Are there any good books or documentaries you can point me too?

 

Incidentally I always believed that if you are the man at any division, especially anything past the mini weights, you deserve a spot in the hall of fame. The percentage of people who win the lineal title is minuscule to the amount of people competing in the division. However guys like Leon Spinks and Primo (to a lesser degree) make this a difficult decision, and that's just speaking in the heavyweight division. I have loosened my stance on this as I feel we do have to consider more of the entire body of work, but I mean if it's not a HOF achievement to be the absolute number one man in your division it has to be a deep consideration, more important that any other, I would think.

 

The Harder THey Fall by Budd Shulberg.

 

Yes.

It is inescapable that Carnera should be in the hall given the other fighters of the period who are.

The controversy surrounding his career only strengthens his case.

 

Better to throw half the fighters out of the hall, so that there never pops up a question why Carnera or Leon Spinks are not in.

 

What's done more than anything to change his historical reputation in recent years is ready access to action footage [particularly his improvement from Sharkey I to II, coinciding with Jack's decline from their first bout to title rematch.]

No, he wasn't a great fighter, but he was a courageous one who no referee ever counted ten over, with good stamina, and two qualities unusual for a tall heavyweight of his era. He could move reasonably well, and he had a long pesky jab. Buddy Baer could hit, but he didn't have Carnera's jab, mobility or stamina. Primo used his size and physical strength to wear Loughran down as their match proceeded. I think Tommy would have handed Buddy the same boxing lesson he gave Buddy's older brother Max.

I know there was a least one Italian documentary out there, but it was not translated to other languages that I'm aware of.

Among books, you might look into the 2011 biography on Carnera by Page. It's far too recent for me to have made any attempt to obtain it, but Page seems determined in the opening of his introduction preview on Amazon to provide a balanced account, rather than mindlessly regurgitate Paul Gallico's sensationalist 1938 essay "Pity the Poor Giant," which begat Budd Schulberg's 1947 novel, "The Harder they Fall." [Schulberg was born to Jewish parents, and was among the first American servicemen to help liberate the Nazi concentration camps after VE Day. In fact, he's the one who actually arrested Leni Riefenstahl, and he can't have been too charitably inclined towards somebody he perceived as a Fascist supporter of Hitler's oldest ally. I do question whether or not Schulberg had ulterior motives with Carnera in mind when he wrote "The Harder They Fall."]

Here's a good back and forth thread about Carnera's reign from May 2011:

www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=314482

 

Thank you for the above and thank you for explaining the reasons why I'm probably going to avoid the Schulberg work on Primo. I will look into getting the 2011 book instead, though no promises on when I can read it, as I have a six week old, lol. I like having my opinion changed on things from a well thought out argument. It's a nice break from the norm. Thanks for ALL of the info and I will check out the thread.

 

Annibus helped me realize why you had the lol after this, or that was my next question, haha.

 

New HOFs keep popping up, and continually botch the process of inclusion.

In 2002, eyes rolled when Ingo got in. More than a few brows were raised when Norton got a 1992 induction into Canastota.

The R&R HOF in Cleveland is a joke, excluding performers who should have been in long ago, and including acts which either aren't R&R, or had just a couple of hits. [Johnny Rotten got it right, when he denounced it as a "**** stain" when the *** Pistols were offered entry in 2006. He did what Ray Davies openly regretted not doing when the Kinks went in. The very concept of such a thing is anathema to what R&R was supposed to be about.]

 

I've no objection to him being in there ,its a meaningless charade anyway that has no connection with a boxers greatness.Put every boxer who held a licence in ,who gives a ****?

 

It didn't even convince Sharkey' s wife if you read the interview he gave to Heller.

 

If thats your criteria for the HOF, who am I to argue?
The other underlined is just supposition without any foundation in fact.

Shulberg liberated no concentration camps he was a lieutenant in the US Navy! Shulberg was seconded from the Navy to the OSS for an assignment to provide photographic evidence for the Nuremberg t rials, that is the extent of his connection with them.
Shulberg was a fine writer, but when he named names to the HUAC he sold his soul,imo

 

Check out the film!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6pLiJQFI9c