Jim Corbett vs Jack Sharkey

What?

 

Corbett's record is 11-4-3.

 

Frank Fletcher's is better!

 

Once again you sackless coward, you can not answer my questions. You start and ask first, then do your best to hide. Where is Tonto62, and Rainer when you need them? Ahahaha. You remain a joke.

Jeffries isn't in this thread ( Stop trying too change the subject ) , and I answered your silly questions before when he is the subject material. I suggest you spend more time with your Free Masons in the hopes they can make you a better man though I sincerely doubt it.

Last time! How many historical lists from 1920-1960 had Jack Sharkey over Corbett? Your reply is?.....

The answer is likely ZERO, in other words the vast majority of historians, boxing managers and fighters of the time are in agreement that Corbett greater.

 

You seriously discount Corbett's speed and natural athleticism. He was kid quick. You should study his skills. I suggest the lighting fast combination that floored Fitzsimmons, and his ability to quickly bend at the waist, deliver a straight to the body and get out of the way before the other guy could counter. He was also a nasty in-fighter, erat at intercepting punches, and hard to hit cleanly to the head. These skills can be seen on an old grainy film from 1897 that runs slow if you know what watching. I think if you did watch the films, you get it. And I also think if you put Sharkey or anyone under the same technology of film on what's left of Corbett in the ring, you downgrade them.

In a 12 round format, Corbett could beat lots of famous boxers, even Joe Louis.

Gene Tunney was one of the smartest champions, he sparred with Corbett was and came away impressed. Corbett must have been in his 50's.

 

Side note, Mcvey is banned racist fool. Siding with him only says I got under you skin, and he runs from my questions. I correct him often.

Back to this topic, Okay I get it Bukkake, you think Risko is better than Corbett. No boxing historian would agree with that! How many non ranked opponents did Risko or Sharkey for that matter lose to? With Corbett its hall of fame only people. Therein lies the difference.

If Corbett had as many fights, he would have beaten plenty more. Risko made his living as a durable try hard punching bag who mostly lost. The late 20's and early 30s was a down time for heavyweight boxing.

As for Jack Sharkey himself, did he even deserve to be champion? Be honest. The answer is no. He belted Schmeling low in the first fight and received a gift decision in the re-match to become champion. Coming off the crooked decision in the 2nd fight, he defended against Carnera ( A fighter who's ripped here ) and got knocked out.

So he didn't earn the championship ,and made 0 title defenses, along with failing to win 16 out of 53 fights. Many of the opponents Sharkey lost to you need to look up. I listed Risko was he was one of the many, and then you entire argument is built around a journeyman with many losses. When Journeyman upsets what is viewed as the best of the time, the times aren't so good.

There are very few Godfrey scribes here. Chuck might be the only one, and he things the dirty lo blow artists was handcuffed in fixed fights. The 1930's had a real problem with fixed fights, something like 7 titles changed hands on low blows before a rule was put it.

 

So the difference between Risko and Corbett, is that while Corbett only lost to HOFers, Risko lost to loads of non-ranked opponents?

I respectfully disagree. I think the biggest difference is that Risko had a total of 142 paid bouts, against a long list of some of the best heavies and light heavies of his time. He lost a lot of fights, but also won quite a few against good opposition.

In your opinion, Risko was nothing but a "try hard punching bag". Ok, you may not think he was better or had a better resume than Corbett - which is fair enough. But why go out of you way, in an attempt to belittle a man, who defeated 7 of the 13 world champs he met? Corbett beat 2 of the 4 world champs he fought. Spot the difference?

Anyway, this thread is not really about Corbett vs Risko... it's about Corbett vs Sharkey. Though we don't have a lot of footage of Corbett, we do have enough to get a rough idea of how he fought - and anyone with unbiased eyes can see, that Sharkey was the superior fighter.

I don't care what 1960 experts had to say on the subject, since they obviously didn't have access to the footage we have today. I would much rather trust today's informed "historians" - who, at the time of writing, are voting 14-2 in favour of Sharkey in the poll.

 

Louis is vastly better, but Corbett's style is the right one to beat Louis IMO

No way I'd pick Corbett, but there's an argument to be made, especially over 12.

 

I'm neither banned, racist, or a fool.

The middle meat of this post has been deleted out of courtesy to the OP who doesn't deserve to have his thread hijacked.

Corbett is 11-4-3, its reasonable to assume that if he had more fights and wins he would also have more losses!

 

Here he is Mendoza's glove puppet!lol

 

Risko beat the following men who were ranked when he beat them.
Loughran
Levinsky
Baer
Poreda
Maloney
Von Porat
Uzcudun
Griffiths
Sharkey

 

Sharkey easily like a sparring session

 

Reviewing Jack Sharkey's career, I find him lucky to beat Schmeling, no match for Louis, and Ko'd by Carnera. But what about his not so talked about matches? He was suspect more than once. Read below and learn.


11–5 Jack Renault PTS 10 06/04/1925 [url]Arena[/url], [url]Boston[/url] Some controversy, as one Massachusetts paper, the [url]Lowell Sun[/url], had Renault winning majority of rounds. This was a major blow to Renault's career.

>> Sounds like Sharkey got a gift win here!


Jim Maloney DQ 9 (12) 05/06/1925 [url]Braves Field[/url], [url]Boston[/url] Sharkey led on points for 7 rounds, but was floored five times in round 8 and once in the 9th before being fouled.

>>Sharkey floored six times and escaped with a win via a DQ. Not very impressive!


Tom Heeney 12 13/01/1928 [url]Madison Square Garden[/url], New York Attendance: 17,000. Judge George Kelley voted for Sharkey, Judge George Patrick called it a draw, and Referee Denning gave Heeney the verdict.

>>>Could not separate himself from Heeney.


King Levinsky UD 15 18/09/1933 [url]Comiskey Park[/url], [url]Chicago[/url] Sharkey down in the 1st round. The referee scored it 55-45 for Levinsky, and the referees had it 53-47 and 56-44. Sharkey appeared to win rounds 4, 6, and 7, and Levinsky took all the others.

>>>Levinsky was not that good. Yet he was way ahead of Sharkey! Corbett would easily out box Jack Sharkey...let's get real.


Tommy Loughran SD 15 27/09/1933 [url]Phillies Ballpark[/url], [url]Philadelphia[/url], United States Sharkey down in 10th. After a "drab fight" one judge had it 7-4-4 for Loughran, the other 7-6-2 for Sharkey while the referee had it a draw (6-6-3) but, as the rules then allowed, gave his decision for Loughran. [url](New York Times)[/url]

>>>Loughran had Sharkey down? Looks like Jack had a glassy chin.


Phil Brubaker UD 10 25/06/1936 [url]Fenway Park[/url], [url]Boston, Massachusetts[/url] Sharkey down in the 1st round.

>>> Phil who had Sharkey down?

 

You are all three. As I told you Box Rec is not a good source for Corbett.

Try Wikipedia, you racist, banned, fool.

Corbett. 35 fights. 24 wins 3 losses. The three losses were to Jeffries and Fitzsimmons. There is a DQ loss to Tom Sharkey, but it wasn't Corbett who caused it. If you think any of the below is wrong, prove it you moron, We both know you can't. And you continue to duck my question, which boxing list from 1930-1960 has J Sharkey over Corbett? How about NONE.

[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_J._Corbett[/url]