Why isn't Carnera in the IBHOF?

1930-03-24 : Johnny Risko 196 lbs beat Victorio Campolo 225¼ lbs by SD in round 10 of 10

• Location: Madison Square Garden, New York, New York, USA
• Referee: Arthur Donovan
• Judge: Charles F. Mathison
• Judge: George Patrick

An unpopular decision, as 11,000 people booed the verdict. Referee Donovan voted for Risko, after Judges Mathison (for Campolo) & Patrick (Risko) split.

Isn't Risko the guy who somebody thinks was one of best of the era? Didn't Risko beat Max Baer, jack sharkey, king Levinsky, Ernie Schaaf yet Risko in two fights never convincingly beat victorio campolo. Risko drew with Campolo and also got a unpopular win over him.

 

The Draw robbed Risko of a well deserved win.
The Split Decision probably went Risko's way because Campolo consistently fouled, throughout the bout.

In each bout, Risko was giving up 2st. in weight; 7 inches in height and 8 inches in reach.

The guy with all the physical advantages and a penchant for fouling couldn't manage a win over sub-200lb opponent, in two fights.

 

Risko is the guy who has wins over.
Loughran x2
Maloneyx3
Levinsky x3
Griffiths
Persson
Uzcudun
Heeney
Rojasx3
Delaney
Godfrey
Berlenbach
VonPorat
Galento
Olin
Walker
Scott
Sharkey
Baer
Schaaf
16 of these wins were against ranked heavyweights!


And somebody, ME says that's a better list of scalps than Carnera ever managed!

 

If you really think that Risko was than good then you ought to be fighting his corner.

 

And, you didn't even need to include Campolo...

 

I understand your point but Ali is really not in the top thirty punchers because he did not deserve to be. I don't even think anyone rates Primo as a puncher at all. All I've read is that he was musclebound and couldn't punch. That is why the huge amount of KO's are a serious question mark to me .. that being said , even if his career was padded there came a time when he fought world class guys for the time and won some so I by no means am saying he was terrible, just one of those fighters that never started from a solid foundation. He may have ended up much better if he had a career where he was trained to excel.

 

I just did!

 

Exactement!!!

 

No, you just used him to attack Carnera.

If you really think that he was the standout heavyweight of the era, outside of the obvious top three, then you should be arguing his case as I argue Carnera's.

 

No.I replied to another silly post by Choklab.

I told you before ,I won't make anymore threads here.
I don't care what yours and Choklab's opinions are ,so why would I want to spend time trying to convince you? I'm just highlighting nonsense when I see it.

 

If Risko is such a criminally underrated fighter, and such a standout among the contenders of the era, then you should argue that case for his sake.

Not to convince me or Choklab of anything, and not show that Carnera was no good, but to correct a major historical misunderstanding in its own right.

 

You just don't get it, I don't care. I've listed the wins he had over men who were either ranked when he beat them or before or after , 16 wins were over currentkly ranked fighters that's better than just about anybody in the division in those two decades!

Posters will either accept that evidence or they won't .It wont make the slightest difference to me either way!

 

Risko fought a lot. He was obviously a very tough hombre, but he's the kind of guy who needs two chances to beat really a good fighter or not good enough to beat the same guy twice. That's no snub, because many champions with that schedule might not do any better. I respect that kind of fighter a lot. Risko earned every win he ever got with blood sweat and tears but since he fought so much he lost a lot of times too. If he was a blond Irish guy or a giant Italian or a handsome Jewish fighter instead of an Austrian with a bad shoulder Risko might have been matched to become a better draw.

 

Who the hell says Primo or Ali needs or deserves to be a in the top thirty punchers! This argument that somebody with 80% ko record needs to be a banger is something said only in order to support the folklore about Primo that does not stand up.

If it's good enough for Ali to be a non puncher with an 81% Ko record (in his first career) why make a deal of Carnera being a non puncher with a 80% record?

 

I have a hunch you don't know any of this. When you came up with that inaccurate Carnera v campolo report I came back with film. When I came up with a report on Risko v Campolo split decision being loudly bood you came up with a "probably". Where is the proof of the constant fouling of campolo? Do You have film, or another report? Or is it just a probably?