Why Schmeling is rarely mentioned with guys like Walcott/Charles/Patterson?

Patterson's style is almost the same as Tyson's. If it could work today, we'd see it more often. That style is hugely popular with casuals thanks to Cus D Amatos brilliance. There's a reason there are no 5'11 short armed aggressive guys who use quick head movement in today's HW division.

Subtle head movement and timing is how he was able to beat Louis. The guy was brilliant. I suggest watching if you have time.

This content is protected

 

I thought the opposite was true. Schmeling really shot up in the rankings well after he retired, I assume because of all of the great things Joe Louis went on to accomplish after their fights.

 

Well yes, the 1950’s which I believe was when those ratings were referenced WAS later after both Louis and Schmeling had retired

 

Yeah his ratings changed drastically as each decade progressed

 

Then we won't find a consensus I'm afraid. Harold Johnson accomplished nothing at HW to be compared to Sharkey.

 

His record at HW is better then Sharkey. He has wins over
Charles
Machen
Nino Valdez
Bob Satterfield
Jimmy Bivins
Arturo Godoy
Doug Jones
Archie Moore
Clarence Henry
Sharkey doesn’t compare to Johnson.

 

He was a smart guy and a good fighter. I don’t begrudge him that. I just don’t think he was as good as Walcott or Charles or Patterson. All I’m saying lol. It’s not an anti 30s thing. Def a nice video. Maybe better head movement then I previously gave him credit for.
I don’t think many guys fully copy peekaboo but their are aspects of it still very much ingrained into all fighters.

 

Charles was extremely inconsistent at this point of his career, he lost almost as much as he won.
Beating Satterfield isn't anything to rave about.
Valdes was young, before his prime.
Godoy was shot.
He won one fight in 5 tries against Moore.

If you think Sharkey's resume doesn't compare to that, then I suggest you to check it again. Sharkey faced top 10 contenders in almost half of his fights.

You really overrate 1950s fighters...

 

I don’t overrate anyone. Johnson is a hall of famer for Christ sake lol. I get it Sharkeys wins over Wills and Schmeling and Primo and Loughran are good. Almost as good as Charles, Moore, Bivins, Machen. Some of your arguments over Johnson could be directed rihht back at Sharkey. But after that is where Johnson is a bit deeper imo. I have a soft spot for the fifties but that doesn’t affect my rankings of how good I think a fighter is.

 

His resume stacks up to Patterson, Charles, and Walcott at Heavyweight. Me and Cross Trainer already went over it. It's arguably as good as Frazier's.

 

Yeah I’m not arguing that. He’s right there. He’s top 20-25 area. I wouldn’t say as good as Frazier but I get the argument.

 

He's not HoFer for his HW work though.

Almost? One guy has wins over two lineal champions, arguably the best contender ever and ATG P4P fighter who happened to be very good at HW, the other has 1-5 vs Moore and Bivins... Not to mention that Sharkey's resume is significantly deeper than that.

 

That video made me reconsider Louis's chances against Ali, since many of the things Schmeling was doing were also things Ali could pull off. Distance control and movement to prevent Louis from planting himself especially.

Weird that Schmeling, of all the apparently un-Ali-like boxers out there, would be the guy to demonstrate it.

 

Because bias.

Patterson is one of the most overrated HW champion in history.

And Schmeling's top wins are better than Walcott's, even including the latter's controversial loss to the ageing Louis. Besides, Walcott lost every 4th bout in his career, steadily from beginning to end all through his mid-years.

 

Where do you often see those guys being ranked significantly higher than Schmeling?