Jack Sharkey vs. Primo Carnera I (longest available version now on youtube)

Where we agree--the fight for the most part, except for the 4th and 15th rounds, was so so rather than exciting.

Where we disagree:

Carnera "showed no chin"--He went down from what looked like a perfect left hook to the chin. He got up and fought back well. Almost every champion on film goes down, including great ones. Obviously Carnera didn't have an iron chin, at the very top level, but I don't see that this fight showed him as having a particularly weak chin, either. Sharkey hit him quite a bit in the 15th and Carnera stayed on his feet.

"The reason he didn't get knocked out is because Sharkey was too tired to knock him out."

Sharkey didn't look that tired to me in the 15th. And Carnera had gone 15 also.

"His jab was never that effective."

I have to disagree. It kept Sharkey at bay quite a bit and scored often and kept the fight competitive. The problem for Carnera is that the jab was about all he showed in this one. His right crosses and left hooks seemed to be mere cuffs, and I only remember him trying an uppercut once.

I generally agree with your evaluation of Sharkey, except I believe he had more problems with Carnera's jab than you credit. He showed a lot of head movement and was certainly an elusive target. As for the strong 15th for Sharkey, had Carnera ever gone past 10 before? I don't think so. If not Sharkey had a big advantage, as he had gone 15 before.

As for the fight as a whole, I notice you score these 10 rounds 5-4-1 for Sharkey. Competitive. That is how I saw it also. If Carnera would have had the big 15th rather than Sharkey, would a decision for him on rounds have been unfair? Sharkey certainly looked determined to finish strong, perhaps indicating that he feared he had not put the fight away to that point.

My bottom line would be that while limited, Carnera was competitive with one of the two best heavies in the world. He had only been boxing for three years, so conceivably more experience against top men would help him.

 

Sharkeys ko% 24.53
Going into the fight Sharkey had 45 fights under his belt.

Carnera 51.

 

Carnera doesn't snap his jab, but there's a lot of weight and muscle behind it. He hit Ernie Schaaf with it time and time again and killed him with it in their 1933 fight. The next day ringside reporters like Bill Corum discounted its power, and even when Schaaf died a few days later, they still couldn't wrap their minds around the fact that Carnera's jab could have caused Ernie's death and instead insisted it was Max Baer's blows in his fight with Schaaf six months earlier which really killed him, forgetting that Schaaf had three intervening fights before the Carnera fight in which he made creditable performances. The complete theater version of the Carnera-Schaaf fight shows Ernie getting hit with jab after jab with a few rights thrown in for good measure. Just imagine getting pummeled with punch after punch by a man as big and powerful as Primo.

Primo's size and willingness to hang in there presented a heck of a problem for the heavyweights of the era. Sharkey wasn't as tall or rangy as Max Baer. He didn't have that long, looping right hand which could reach Carnera's chin like Max did. He figured he had to box carefully. Both you and Jason are quite correct that the first Sharkey-Carnera fight was a close one. I've seen the entire theater version and a round or two the other way could have changed the outcome.

 

One point here is very good. Sharkey's low KO percentage. Still he was a good enough puncher to become champion, and KO'd Jim Maloney, Jack Delaney, Tommy Loughran, and Phil Scott. Now and then he seemed to produce a KO punch, but not consistently. Not one of the top punchers of the era--in a class with Schmeling, Baer, or Louis.

The second point I think is misleading. Sharkey apparently had an extensive amateur career in the navy, and had been fighting top five men since 1924 (Charley Weinert). A very high percentage of his fights were against top men. Carnera had met some good men, but his record at this point was much more padded. I don't think Carnera had boxed prior to 1928 when he was 22. So on the question of effective experience Sharkey is way ahead. And I think it shows when you watch the two men on film. Sharkey is a natural. Carnera is not a fluent boxer but a huge man relying on size, strength, and good mobility for such a big fellow. This did mean that the younger Carnera had much more room for improvement. Sharkey had already peaked.

 

Carnera looked much the same 3 years later against Baer, when he had 84 fights under his belt.He could have had a thousand fights he would never be a fluid puncher,or snap his jab .
He boxed like he had learned it by numbers.

 

Was Primo Carnera Most Responsible for the Death of Ernie Schaaf?

Carnera is one of the most controversial-and lightly regarded-heavyweight champions in history.

In his heyday there were those who regarded Carnera-who was the second tallest Heavyweight Champion up to that time, and the heaviest by a wide margin-as a terror, a veritable man among boys. Especially after Schaaf’s death, there were cries of alarm that Carnera was simply too big and too strong to box safely, that he had too much of a size advantage over almost all of his opponents. Some commentators called for a new weight class above the heavyweights, where Carnera would be matched only with other giants like himself.

At the same time, though, there were plenty of observers who viewed Carnera as quite the opposite of too dangerous to be allowed in the ring against most heavyweights. If anything they regarded him as the one at risk of serious injury if he faced a talented opponent.

It was something of an open secret that Carnera was managed by organized crime figures. There was reason to believe-and this has since become the prevailing view-that he built up his impressive record through a series of fixed fights, probably including even the championship fight against Sharkey. (Though it’s also believed that the good-natured and somewhat dim-witted Carnera himself was unaware his fights were fixed.) Critics regarded him as untalented and uncoordinated, with little punching power and little ability to take a punch.

So when Schaaf gave such a lackluster performance, culminating in collapsing from a light jab, there was ample reason for the skepticism. If he wasn’t paid to take a dive, he would have been the exception.

But if Carnera couldn’t punch, and if he only got to where he got because his opponents were paid off, how could he have done sufficient damage to Schaaf to kill him?

Was Max Baer Most Responsible for the Death of Ernie Schaaf?

Many boxing historians believe that the true explanation for the ring death of Ernie Schaaf lies back in August of 1932, when he fought Max Baer.

Baer and Schaaf had fought less than two years earlier, with Schaaf prevailing by 10 round decision in a fight the New York Times called “as exciting a heavyweight encounter as has been seen here for some time.”

Interestingly that had been Baer’s first fight after an earlier ring death. The power punching contender Baer had pummeled Frankie Campbell with Campbell unconscious and held up by the ropes, unable to fall. Campbell was rushed to the hospital and died from the injuries he sustained in the fight.

Baer was hugely affected by what happened. He took several months off and seriously considered retirement. Though he returned to the ring, and indeed later held the Heavyweight Championship briefly (defeating Carnera), followers of the sport say he never came close to living up to his potential. For decades he suffered from nightmares about the Campbell fight, he drank heavily, he adopted a clowning devil-may-care attitude toward life, and he no longer displayed a “killer instinct,” routinely letting opponents off the hook when he feared he could seriously hurt them.

In the 1932 rematch against Schaaf, Baer fought cautiously, perhaps holding back as was now his wont. The fight was basically even all the way. At the very end, however, Baer landed a devastating punch and knocked Schaaf out cold. Because it happened with less than 10 seconds remaining in the very last round, the bout ended before Schaaf could be counted out, thus it was not officially a knockout. Instead the fight went to a decision, with Baer narrowly getting the nod.

When Schaaf died several months later, few made a connection with the Baer fight. Later boxing historians did, however.

It seemed the logical explanation for how Schaaf could have died at the hands of the “fraud” Carnera. Perhaps he’d suffered major but undiagnosed brain damage from the Baer knockdown, and Carnera’s weak blows had been the straw that broke the camel’s back. Perhaps Baer had actually killed two opponents in his career.

Maybe. But there are problems with this theory. Not only was this at a time of his career when Baer tended to let up on his punches precisely because he never again wanted to be responsible for killing or seriously hurting an opponent, but Schaaf had in fact fought three times in between the Baer and Carnera fights, winning two and losing one, and showing no ill effects of having been knocked down by Baer.

Is There Some Other Explanation for the Death of Ernie Schaaf?

Some commentators believe that it was neither Carnera nor Baer who was most responsible for killing Schaaf.

The autopsy done on Schaaf revealed significant swelling of tissue surrounding the brain, or meningitis. Had that swelling already been present as a result of the damage done by Baer, presumably Schaaf would not have been able to fight as effectively as he had in winning two out of three fights in the interim.

But if the swelling happened after those three fights, and caused him to be so weak and ineffectual as to draw boos from the crowd against Carnera, and then to die soon after the fight, what could have caused it?

As it turns out, Schaaf suffered a bad case of influenza shortly before stepping into the ring with Carnera. He’d been so weakened by the illness that he’d even taken the drastic step of going into seclusion at a religious retreat outside of Boston to try to recuperate.

It’s entirely possible that he had not recovered from the flu when he fought Carnera, that he was still weak, and that he already had the swelling around his brain that would ultimately kill him.

Conclusion

The evidence as to what caused the ring death of Ernie Schaaf is not conclusive. What is most likely is that it came about as a result of multiple factors.

Certainly he took a lot of punches from Carnera in his final bout. And while Carnera was not the fearsome slugger some fans assumed from his imposing bulk, he probably wasn’t quite the joke later commentators made him out to be. Regardless of how much dishonest help he got early in his career, he seems to have developed into at least a respectable contender on his own merits. Once Mob support was withdrawn and he was on his own, his career didn’t fall apart completely. He was knocked out by some excellent opponents, including Baer and a young Joe Louis, but he also won his share of fights against contenders. So he was not without skills and not without punching power, and it’s reasonable to believe he could do some damage when he landed the kind of punches he did against Schaaf.

But it’s also reasonable to believe that Baer’s knocking Schaaf unconscious a few months earlier could have done the kind of brain damage to make him more vulnerable to later punishment. Maybe Baer did indeed hold back in some of his bouts after killing Frankie Campbell. But he still was one of the most devastating power punchers in the division, and there’s no denying he’d flattened Schaaf with a heavy blow. A decisive knockdown like that can have permanent consequences, even if they are not immediately apparent.

But probably the most significant factor was indeed Schaaf’s returning to the ring when he was not yet fully recovered from influenza and didn’t realize that he had swelling around his brain and was putting his life in jeopardy by fighting in that condition.

 

Excellent post with some great, well explained points and a reasoned, balanced mindset. There's times I read a topic on here and I feel like I lost some brain cells in the process. Then I read something like this, and I feel that I actually learned something new and can re-evaluate something I already had filed away in my head. Much appreciated.

 

Not mine, I copied it from an article.

 

This is a generally balanced evaluation. I have a couple of disagreements or quibbles:

"somewhat dim-witted Carnera"

Carnera became fluent in four languages despite being mainly uneducated. He managed his money wisely and died wealthy. He may have been naive, which is not the same as stupid, but calling him dim-witted is invidious.

"Critics regarded him as untalented and uncoordinated, with little punching power and little ability to take a punch."

The reason to watch boxing films is to decide to what extent the critics are correct or over the top. (aside--this will mean little to non-US posters, but I watched a critic of Tom Brady say today that 15 current NFL quarterbacks could have done what he did this year if they were on the Tampa Bay team. Everyone has critics. Doesn't in and of itself make the criticism valid.)

"Carnera probably wasn't the joke later commentators made him out to be" "developed into at least a respectable contender on his own merits"

In fairness to this writer, the other side of the coin.

Could Carnera have won the title legitimately against a slipping Sharkey? Sharkey was the highest paid athlete in the world as champion. Who would pay him enough to induce him to toss that away by taking a dive? Sharkey lived into his nineties and always maintained his loss to Carnera was on the level. If he took a dive because of a threat, wouldn't he likely have come forward decades later when everybody else involved was dead? Anyway, the film will be the best evidence.

One thing I noticed in this first Carnera-Sharkey fight. For the all the sloppy and weak-looking hooks and right crosses, Carnera threw and missed a right uppercut in a late round that looked fierce. Perhaps as muscle-bound as he was, the uppercut played into his musculature in a way his other power punches didn't.

 

Several sports writers that met Carnera came away with the idea he wasn't the sharpest knife in the box. Sharkey interrupted his training camp twice and drove to his home because of threats to his children. Gangsters were all over his camp. Sharkeys manager and Sharkey's wife thought he took a dive and that's from Sharkey's own lips.What incentive was there for Sharkey to reveal he had taken a dive?Who knows who was still alive or what their connections would have done had he opened his mouth?
I think he went into the tank and I think the ko is theatrical nonsense ,each must form his own opinion,.