Nice except you did not answer the question. Again. I think you're basically not a serious guy. Lots of posts but nothing definitive to say.
Exactly what question do you feel that I have not answered? At least I am able to bring some arguments to that table here, while you dont seem to be able to offer anything except personal attacks. Resorting to attacking another poster, is not a sign of strength incidentally!
There are too many set ups in Carnera's record to give him a realistic chance against a heavy duty bomber like Morrison. Baer clowned around, Morrison would be going for it, and would win by brutal stoppage early .Too much speed, too much power.
Morrison would beat Carnera, not to say Carnera doesn't have better resume but da preem would get caught badly by Morrison's hook. Morrison had elite offensive skills.
Uhh... Morrison is not bigger than Preem. Not even close. And they had the neutral corner rule in Primo's time.
That reads like you are suggesting Morrison was bigger than Primo. If that is what you mean, you are incorrect. Primo was a giant. And not a flabby one. Dude was shredded.
Even if we accept that you are right, and that Morrison looks better on film, that doesnt actually get you very far. Baer beat a lot of people who looked better than him on film, and more importantly he got much much better results than Morrison in the real world. Add to that the fact that he had a all time chin, while Morrison distinctly lacked durability, and you cannot build a case for Morrison on this alone. As for having no neutral corner rule, that would have cut both ways. It would not have been a good thing for a guy with a chin like Morrison.
This content is protected This brings us to the improvements in sports science argument. I think that boxing is definitely one sport where we have seen mixed results on that. On a side note, I have speculated that Carnera might have had Acromegaly, but of course we have no diagnosis.