Schmeling-Sharkey II 1932 one of the worst decisions of all time

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sK0sCzGOcrQ

See for yourself. Schmeling was robbed, he dominated sharkey

 

I think Schmeling won.

 

Sharkey had a convincing win here imo

 

Put down the crack pipe

 

I wonder if anyone on here has or has seen the unedited version if this fight? Is it available?
In my opinion Schmelig is 2-0 vs Sharkey. I have read that of twenty reporters on press row 16 had Schmeling winning 2 had it even and just two gave it to Shareky. Out of 20. He most definitely got robbed.
Gene Tunney who was in attendance said it was robbery said it was a miscarriage of justice the wrong man won.
One reporter said it was 6-4 Max through ten and then he swept the final 5 rounds. That's 11-4 how anyone could swing that to Shareky is crazy.

 

Sharkey won and lost the title in fixes in my opinion.

 

Very plausible.^ Sharkey needs the Adam Pollack treatment. Very mysterious happenings surround his career. Would love to learn more about his two matches with Schmeling, his bouts with Godfrey and Wills. The alleged dive against Carnera. Even his mentor relationship with Schaaf. Sharkey openly hung out with mob characters of the day. Interesting stuff and I heard the last biography on him was pretty light in detail.

 

Crazy. The deck was stacked against Max. The powers that be wanted no part of him holding the championship. Perhaps Sharkey knew he had fight in bag. I would think he would of taken more chances late as he was being dominated if he didn't.

 

It wasnt because of Hitler or the Nazi's. It was simply that Max wasnt American and the powers that be didnt want him taking the title back to Europe. He outboxed Sharkey but was robbed here.

 

Do you own or have you seen the fight against Sharkey in it's entirety? If so, does the fight come off as more competitive or less competitive than the highlights?
I agree that the loss to Sharkey had more to do with jingoism attitude rather than actual opposition to Hitler's party. I think the latter played more of a role later when he was denied the rightful shot against Braddock.

 

The 1930's had lots of problems with bad decisions, and DQ's. Non-Americans particularly at heavyweight were victim to some questionable score cards.

 

Yup.

I don't know if they edited the tape to make Sharkey look bad, but his head was snapping back the whole fight from Schmeling's jabs.

I also got the impression that Sharkey was just fighting to last, as if he knew that if he was on his feet at the end, he would take the decision.

Sharkey looked so bad in this one, it reinforces that his KO by Carnera a year later was probably on the up and up.

 

What Judges? If Schmeling was going to be robbed he would never have won the title on a foul ,in the first place.

 

What does the second fight being a robbery have to do with the first? If it was fixed maybe they fixed the second after the result of the first. Remember, Sharkey was a 2 to 1 favorite in the first fight so Schmeling wasnt expected to win even if the fight was fought on its merits. In the rematch Schmeling was a very narrow favorite.

 

I was looking at the "bias ," if they didn't want Schmeling as champ, they had a golden opportunity to deprive him of the title by not allowing the foul.The fact that the foul was upheld stands the biased theory on its head ,imo.