When people were discussing how Louis would perform in Tyson's era, some referred to Louis' loss to Schmeling as a reason why Louis wouldn't be able to survive in Tyson's era. So let's discuss it. How would Schmeling do against Tyson's competition?
Unlike Joe Louis and Mike Tyson, Max Schmeling never managed to dominate a definable era. We would expect him to win some and lose some, against Tyson's opposition, on that point alone. He is probably not going to dominate. Having said that, he brings a remarkable skill set to teh table, and you would see some impressive wins. You might even get a result somewhere, where he succeeded where Tyson failed.
Now that is tough. It is probably fair to say, that he should start as a favorite, over teh belt holders that Tyson beat. It is probably also fair to say that he might well lose to one. He is not going to have Tyson's consistency against this level of opposition. He simply isn't. Having said that, it is just about possible that he beats Holyfield, where Tyson failed.
I wouldn't pick Max over Berbick, Tucker, Tubbs, Holmes, Fergusson, Pinky, Ruddock, Bruno, Spinks, Tillis... so there you go.
Schmeling spent first half almost of his career as a light heavyweight. He only weighed 188 in many of his heavyweight matches. I think the size difference by the 1980s would of left Max with a few losses. I don’t think his stationary style would do him well, when he is giving up height, reach and weight - every time out. I do think Max could give any fighter a tough match up through the 60s. In fact I think he is a nightmare match up for Marciano of all people. Fun match ups with Max would be Marciano, Ingo, Patterson, Ellis, even Frazier and Quarry. But once we get to guys that come in routinely at 6’2 220 I think it’s too big a hill to climb to pick him as a consistent winner.
I think he runs into a problem with some of the bigger men who could punch. As much as I hate to say that Max Schmeling would lose to guys like Bruno, Smith and Ruddock, the reality is that he might
1930s heavyweights just arent as good losers: Marvis Frazier, P. Thomas, Bruno winners: C. Williams, Tokyo Douglas, Real Deal.
Are you saying that Schmelling would beat a roided walking bodybuilder Holyfield? not a chance in hell
He didn't truly dominate because he wasn't given the chance. He would have beaten Braddock if given his rightful shot, and Ring rankings show he was by far the most consistent ranked boxer of the 1930s. Apart from the Baer loss, his prime years were pretty consistent.
I think the Baer loss is overstated. I've read that Schmeling, an avid viewer of footage mainly studied his loss to Loughran. Baer had vastly improved by the time of Schmeling. I have no doubt Schmeling would have done much better in a rematch,
