Poll: How good was Primo Carnera?

Frank Bruno level?

 

Being a lineal champ does not make you an all-time great.

 

They don`t say much for the rest of the world though.

 

As good as the best fighter that he beat in his career.

 

I would actually disagree there.

I think that Jack Sharkey was a somewhat better fighter, but Carnera got him on the right day, and the better fighter doesn't always win.

 

Carnera was unjustly maligned by a New York media that disliked him and was probably prejudiced against Italians in general during his time. The “mob connections” made good copy and sold papers. Was he handled by mob types yes and did he get involved with some fixed fights yes.
However on film his skills are adequate, and he uses his advantage in size well. Speed would always be an issue for him and his power was below average. However he worked hard and was better than what ppl were led to believe about him. The Baer fight did him no favors and little was made that the first Knockdown Carnera severely rolled his ankle, Ruining his balance for the remainder of the fight.
I’d say he’s a bottom 3rd of men that became lineal heavyweight champions but I believe he was better than Braddock, L. Spinks and maybe couple of others and his sheer size would make him a challenge to be solved for many fighters of his era and the era that preceded him.

 

Being a lineal champion doesnt make you an ATG.
JohnnyWilson
Rocky Graziano
Hugo Corro
Paul Pender
Vito Antuofermo
Alan Minter
Chad Dawson
Shannon Briggs
Glen Johnson
Randy Turpin
Bobo Olson
Primo Carnera
Ingemar Johansson
Jermain Taylor
Kelly Pavlik
Sergio Martinez
Bud Smith
Bob Olin
Gus Lesnevich
Freddie Mills
Jim Braddock
Baltazar Sanchili
Teo Cruz
Charlie Magri

Are not ATG's,imo.

 

This sounds about right.

There is a category of lineal champions who only really have one or two good wins, and Carnera has a few to be fair.

 

I don't agree with this.

I think size made him successful in his own era. Obviously it was something beyond just sheer size or every giant would be champion, but given his skill set, he would not have been successful if he were, let's say, 200 lbs.

 

The department of being the number 1 ranked fighter in the world

 

It works both ways. How successful would Parker or Miller or Charles Martin be if they were 200lb in the 1930s?

 

Well it’s does. Max Schmeling beat Joe Louis. Schmeling was on par with guys Primo beat -and get this, Schmeling really rated and respected Primo as legit.

 

Over the top interpretation of what Schmeling actually said.

 

“Primo carnera was six feet five and weighing around 260lb, had always been considered by experts to be only a mediocre boxer. They said he could not really punch, that he just sort of clubbed his opponents. In fact, his reach was much greater than any opponent, and the leverage that gave him enabled his punches to penetrate almost any defence. In contrast to the experts, I had always considered Carnera to be a technically sound boxer, so I was not in the least suprised to hear he had knocked Sharkey out in the sixth round to become the second European to win the world heavyweight title. Within the year he successfully defended the his title against Paulino. He did this in Italy in front of Mussolini." - Max Schmeling. Autobiography.


Rather looks like Max really rated and respected Primo as legit dosnt it?

 

Nope, it clearly indicates your interpretation of what Max said is wilfully miscontrued in an absurdly positive way ! Mentioning his size and reach are not commendations and all Schmeling said was ,"Carnera was a technically sound boxer".Faint praise which you have embroidered to a ludicrous degree!