Was Schmeling really robbed in his second fight with Sharkey?

Sharkey was not near as inconsistant as people say, it's a myth. From a 1925 loss to unbeaten Bud Gorman, in only the Gob's second year as a pro until his loss to Carnera, he went 25-2-1 with the losses to Dempsey and Schmeling, both controversial and both fights he was winning. BTW I do thing Dempsey was getting to him.
Almost all of his opponents were world class, the likes of Carnera, Wills, Godfrey, Loughran, McTigue, Stribling, Maloney, Risko, Heeney, Schmeling, Scott, Delaney, Gorman, Renault -not alone is that not inconsistent but few fighters ever fought as successfully at heavyweight at this level as did Jack from 1925-33. Schmeling had a good run too but not quiet at Sharkey's level and he had his Uzcuden, Hamas and Daniels days too. Oh and I love Sharkey on film!

 

The irony is that Sharkey was probably the best heavyweight on the planet when Schmeling won the title, and vice versa.

 

I just re-watched the fight on mute like the above commenter suggested and it's still a bad robbery. Sharkey's jab does control the space somewhat in first 4 rounds but he still loses every exchange and from round 8 on Schmeling dominates the footage. Sharkey looks tired and just back pedals. Schmeling definately the effective aggressor, has quicker reflexes and throws the much more crisp punches. Sharkey's face is marked up and Schmeling looks fresh. It may not have been 15-0 like the British commentater had it but Shmeling wins pretty wide. Also take into account Schmeling was the champion and you don't lose your title like that.

Sharkey seems to have a bit of a shady history. This "win" was a robbery. He was accused of a fixed fight in both his title fight with Carnera and his fight with Unknown WInston.

 

Sharkey had serious mob connections so who knows.
I think he looks a real class performer in the first Schmeling encounter.

 

Bang on!
I wonder would Sharkey have beaten Tunney circa 1927-30?

 

I must admit he is more consistant during that stretch run than I thought but I have his record at 22-3-2 during that stretch according to boxrec not 25-2-1. Still impressive and he does have some great wins on his ledger. But Schmeling has the prime Joe Louis which is biggest win of either man.

 

Sharkey would've been handful for Tunney. Dempsey did wear him down but Dempsey could still bang Tunney's Jab and move style might not have worked against the Gob

 

Oh I'm not knocking Max at all and as you say Louis was a great win and the later loss to Joe had Schmeling well over the top-heavies in thoes days started to slip pretty fast after 30 in general. If only Sharkey had Dempsey on his resumee...But Still Wills, Schmeling, Godfrey, Loughran and Carnera-a pretty good top 5 wins, don't you think?
My points in this are (1) Sharkey's results were not at all inconsistent considering the level of opposition and (2) he is always routinely rated below Schmeling while I think there is a big argument to be made there. Bit like Charles always ahead of Walcott or Wills over Jeannette and McVey?

 

I tend to put Schmeling above Sharkey as well but I can't knock Sharkey the only man to fight Dempsey and Joe Louis....Then add in the fact he also fought Wills. Along with the rest of his record had he fought Tunney you could argue he fought the toughest competition of any heavyweight in history. Close to Ali.

I also like Charles over Walcott as well. The Wills, Jeannette and Mcvey comparisons are razor thin. But so is the other boxers

 

Only one card for this fight on EyeOnTheRing, anyone care to add theirs?

Max Schmeling vs. Jack Sharkey II Fan Cards

 

Have never seen a full version of the fight.
Can't score it, can't tell if it was a robbery or not.

 

I wonder if the full version exists. From the tone of the fight from the available footage it certaintly seems like Schmeling dominated. That video shows a good 27minutes of the fight or approx 9rounds, which is most I've ever seen. Eyewitness testimony also seems to support that it was a robbery, not just from press row but even Tunney a man who knows a thing or two about prize fighting called the verdict a disgrace.

 

"Sharkey the only man to fight Dempsey and Joe Louis"

And he was knocked out by both of them, lasting less than 10 rounds all together.

As a comparison, Lee Savold fought Louis and Marciano. He was also knocked out by both of them, lasting less than 12 rounds all together.

Actually, Sharkey and Savold seem to be fairly similar.

winning % Sharkey 69% (38 of 55)-Savold 67% (101 of 150)

Ko % Sharkey 24% (13 of 55)-Savold 48% (72 of 150)

ko by Sharkey about 1 in 14 (4 of 55)-Savold 1 in 15 (10 of 150)

I'm not trying to make the case that Savold was a top fighter. But he did fight a lot of top men over a longer period than Sharkey and certainly was a better puncher.

Bottom line--let's not puff up Sharkey's record that much. He beat an old Wills. This is on paper a very impressive win, but who really knows. Wills would never again beat a good fighter and was blown out quickly by Uzcudun. Sharkey's win over Schmeling smelled. Okay, he beat Carnera the first time, but Carnera slaughtered him in the rematch.

To me Sharkey is perhaps the most overrated champion.

 

I wasn't inferring that he did well against either man although he was competitive against Dempsey and was an over the hill shot fighter in the Louis fight. Sharkey was a dangerous fighter in the late 20s. Just stating that he has alot of big names on his resume (where he fought those fighters in retrospect to their career is another story). Had he not blown his shot at Tunney by drawing with Heeney and added Gene's list to the resume, that becomes one star studded resume. Dempsey, Louis, Tunney, Wills, Schmeling, Carnera, Godfrey, etc. I never place Sharkey above Schmeling. But he did fight all comers and ducked no one.

 

It kinda a load of nonsense about Sharkey fighting Dempsey and Louis-the Louis fight is an addendum, think McBride-Tyson, Ali-Berbick and whoever else you want. Sharkey fought the best opponents for 8-9 years, black and white and did pretty good, to compare hie resumee to Savold's is either ignorant, boxrecordfethish or trolling.