My previous post, which you have replied to, just now, is an exact copy of a posted reply to choklab, which you responded to, on the previous page. Your initial response does not resemble this one. This one is better, mind.
This is not an overview of a career. This is a report of a losing effort whereby Tunney is stating how the loss came about, using examples from a previous fight to demonstrate and being wise after the event. Putting this forward as "what Tunney thinks of Carneras whole career" when it's really a "what Tunney thinks of Carnera losing one fight" is the wrong thing to do here. We don't know what Tunney would say if he was asked after Primo retired what kind of fighter he was. We don't know he would not say exactly the same kind of thing max schmeling said about primo. Why wouldn't an ex champion say a fellow former champion was effective at what he did and a deserving champion? Unless you can find that kind of thing from actual fight figures (away from the working press) that states Primo was a guy that was not a real fighter, that he was limited and exposed when ever a fight was on the level, then we are best making do with the kind of things Schmeling said about the champion Carnera.
This is a response opinion to two fights that Tunney had actually witnessed from ringside. The comments are from a former heavyweight champion who was there.
Indeed it was. In no way does it outrank Larry gains saying Primo "was a damaging puncher just the same, surprisingly fast, that history had been unkind to him" it does not outrank Sharkey either. Primo was not a fraud. Sharkey said Primo was a "much better fighter than given credit for" who he "didn't credit he might improve" from their first fight and "handled me with ease" in the rematch. Max Schmeling called Primo a "technically sound boxer" who "could penetrate any defence" with his reach and leverage. Unsurprisingly, Max "was not surprised Carnera kayoed sharkey". Max Baer even predicted Carnera would beat Joe Louis!!! That's how serious he rated primo. So it seems fighters of the day, when not asked to asses or analyse a loss, took Primo Carnera as a champion fighter, very seriously indeed!
I would say that we should certainly take a critical view of Tunney's testimony, given some of the other things that he has written!
Interesting that Only a tiny amount voted that Primo Carnera was anything other than a genuinely good fighter who paid his dues. And still man-machine and McVey have not voted!
It's anot idiotic poll. Two of the options contain the word "fraud" and two imply or state outright that he was an ATG. In fairness, the middle option should've been "ATG fraud."