Poll: How good was Primo Carnera?

The reason that Risko never got a shot at the title is that he got beaten at the critical moment.

He was #4 in the end of year rankings for 1932.

He beats Schaff (who was #5 at the end of 1932) in 1933.

It seems inescapable that he was higher.

I think that I have sold Risko short in this department.

Even so, if we are going to accept your argument here, then we are going to radically revaluate his historical standing!

 

No, but that is not the point.

They were both locomotives that seemed to be heading in a given direction, that came off the track at the critical time.

That is what I mean by Ibeabuchi factor.

 

He was never the standout challenger and that is irrefutable.Baer and Schmeling were 1&2!
He beat a sick Schaaf who should not have been in a ring.
Why not do exactly that, his winning resume is better than Carnera's and that is irrefutable too! I've judged him expressly by your criteria.

 

Schaaf amassed a record that compares extremely favourably with Carnera's even though he was dead at 24!
That is my point.

 

The bottom line is that he was dead at 24.

what he might have done in the future is irrelevant.

 

I'm judging him on what he actually did, ie beat.
Braddock
Baer
Loughran x2
Risko
Maloneyx 2
Griffiths
Campolo
Uzcudun
Stribling
Renault
It's my contention that is comparable to what Carnera achieved.

 

If you think that Risko is the greatest fighter of the era, outside of Schmeling, Sharkey, and Baer, then you really need to be arguing his corner in the same way that we are arguing Carnera's!

That would put a small hole below our waterline, and it would be more productive than trying to sell us the Galico story book.

You would be righting a historical injustice!

 

No, it isn’t.

He did not win the lineal title, and he did not win the title eliminator.

Who was actually ranked when he beat them, since you are holding Carnera's feet to the fire on this?

He was one of the best contenders on the era, but regrettably we can’t say more!

 

"He was the best in the world for just one day!!!"....GREAT way to put it!!!

 

I'm not pushing any agenda, I'm just contesting your sweeping statement that Carnera was the best fighter outside of Sharkey,Schmeling and Baer.

I've shown that Risko's scalps are better and that in cases when Carnera and Risko had common opponents Risko beat better versions, of them.
Schaaf's resume also compares favourably with Carnera's.
No one needs Galllico's eye witness accounts , we have Louis's and Tunney's.
I'm not concerned with historical injustice, but gratuitous revisionism without the presentation of any new evidence whatsoever can become rather a yawn.

 

Why would be winning the lineal title mean he was the best?
Was Leon Spinks the best when he beat Ali? Was Jess Willard better than Harry Wills ? You cant win the title if you don't get the opportunity to challenge for it! I've shown who were ranked when Risko beat them in 2 posts. I've also shown that
Campolo
Godfrey
Uzcudun
Lasky
Neusel
Those just off the top of my head ,were not ranked when Carnera beat them. I'm not holding Carnera's feet anywhere I doubt I could lift them.
You've been an apologist for Prime since I can remember ,some new facts to support your position would be nice!

 

If we say the ko of Sharkey was kosher then we can say he was the best man out of those two.

We can't say he was the best in the world because at that time the number 1 and number 2 contenders were Baer and Schmeling,Baer beat the sh*t out of him and Schmeling would have been favourite to do the same!

 

You shouldn't have the word fraud listed in 2 options. If you want to say he was a fraud bum ok but a fraud journeyman? Really a negative spin on journeyman. Journeyman would of sufficed as an option and more ppl would probably choose it, if the negative "fraud" was removed.
I believe he was better than journeyman and picked the next best option.
You seem very interested in Primo's career. Any motivation for this?

 

No he didn't. Most reports said Schaaf was listless in that fight and not the same fighter reporters had seen in numerous other matches.

 

Risko has better wins than Carnera.
Schaaf imo has better wins than Carnera.

Schaaf when he died an autopsy revealed he had inflammation of the brain from 2 virus's influenza and meningitis. He was not sufficiently healed when he entered the ring.

You can rank Carnera ahead of Risko because he was more consistent and didn't suffer nearly as many bad losses. But risko does have better wins.

Schaaf whose entire career was legit was viewed favorably as someone who could be a future champ when he died at age 24.
It's arguable he has the better resume to Carnera had he lived I don't think it would be an argument.

As it stands I do believe Carnera is underrated and I believe he was a top 10 heavy for the 30s.