Obiously who to select adds some subjectivity, and this says nothing of what else was going on with these fights (fighters being out of prime, questionable decisions etc.) and obviously these wins and losses aren't all equal, I was just curious as to how these fighters did against each other, and the rankings it would imply (though obviously not to be taken literally) So in ascending order Johnny Risko 5-10 Sharkey 1-0 Schemling 0-1 Baer 1-1 Stribling 0-1 Loughran 2-3 Schaaf 1-1 Poreda 0-1 Retzlaff 0-2 Tommy Loughran 9-11 Sharkey 1-1 Carnera 0-1 Baer 1-0 Braddock 1-0 Stribling 1-2 Farr 0-1 Risko 3-2 Schaaf 2-2 Poreda 0-1 Neusel 0-1 James J Braddock 2-4 Baer 1-0 Louis 0-1 Loughran 0-1 Farr 1-0 Schaaf 0-1 Retzlaff 0-1 Young Stribling 4-5 Sharkey 0-1 Schmeling 0-1 Carnera 1-1 Loughran 2-1 Risko 1-0 Schaaf 0-1 Max Baer 5-6 Schmeling 1-0 Carnera 1-0 Braddock 0-1 Louis 0-1 Loughran 0-1 Farr 1-1 Risko 1-1 Schaaf 1-1 Primo Carnera 5-6 Sharkey 1-1 Baer 0-1 Louis 0-1 Gains 0-1 Stribling 1-1 Loughran 1-0 Schaaf 1-0 Poreda 0-1 Neusel 1-0 Jack Sharkey 4-5 Schmeling 1-1 Carnera 1-1 Louis 0-1 Stribling 1-0 Loughran 1-1 Risko 0-1 Walter Neusel 3-3 Carnera 0-1 Loughran 1-0 Gains 1-0 Farr 0-1 Schmeling 0-1 (I'm excluding the later fight because it's so far out of the period, of either fighters prime) Poreda 1-0 Larry Gains 2-2 Schmeling 1-0 Carnera 1-0 Farr 0-1 Neusel 0-1 Stanley Poreda 4-4 Risko 1-0 Carnera 1-0 Schaaf 1-1 Loughran 1-0 Louis 0-1 Neusel 0-1 Retzlaff 0-1 Ernie Schaaf 7-6 Carnera 0-1 Baer 1-1 Braddock 1-0 Stribling 1-0 Loughran 2-2 Risko 1-1 Poreda 1-1 Tommy Farr 4-2 Baer 1-1 Braddock 0-1 Louis 0-1 Gains 1-0 Loughran 1-0 Neusel 1-0 Max Schmeling 6-4 Sharkey 1-1 Baer 0-1 Louis 1-1 Gains 0-1 Stribling 1-0 Risko 1-0 Neusel 1-0 Charley Retzlaff 4-1 Risko 2-0 Braddock 1-0 Louis 0-1 Poreda 1-0 Joe Louis 7-1 Sharkey 1-0 Schmeling 1-1 Carnera 1-0 Baer 1-0 Braddock 1-0 Poreda 1-0 Retzlaff 1-0
It goes without saying that the results are utter garbage, I'll keep tweaking the inclusion for a bit, and see if it turns out sensible. The criteria for inclusion is basically having a respectable number of wins if added.
A time of low talented reflected by the results. If not for Louis, the championship would be a game of musical chairs.
Going to add these guys, don't know a lot about them, though I've seen a bit of Neusel, looking through the rankings for others with respectable results Stanley Poreda 4-4 Risko 1-0 Carnera 1-0 Schaaf 1-1 Loughran 1-0 Louis 0-1 Neusel 0-1 Retzlaff 0-1 Walter Neusel 3-3 Carnera 0-1 Loughran 1-0 Gains 1-0 Farr 0-1 Schmeling 0-1 (I'm excluding the later fight because it's so far out of the period, or either fighters prime) Poreda 1-0 Charley Retzlaff 4-1 Risko 2-0 Braddock 1-0 Louis 0-1 Poreda 1-0
Or perhaps so much talent that it could not be tied down by any one talent. Until the GOAT came around I would remove Risko and add someone like Godfrey or Obie Walker, though Risko has a surprising depth of resume
If the talent you speak of had a fantastic record vs. the rest of the field, you can make that case. They don't Too many losses and to lesser fighters. There just wasn't much top talent at heavyweight in the 1930's. Ring Magazine, who loves Louis agrees, and called the 1930's the least talented decade about 2 years ago.
I happen to be of the opinion that the 1930s is underrated in talent and depth. Just doesn't make enough financial sense to not be - you're in the midst of a great depression and the sport was wildly popular a few years earlier making men like Dempsey and Tunney filthy rich. Richer than any other sport America had to offer - that tells me lot of desperate people all over the country were probably trying their hand at this sport to climb their way out of poverty. So many boxing clubs of the day and such fierce regional rivalries. All these men were battle tested. I think the losses piling up to lesser fighters has more to do with the schedule of these fighters, than it does with their lack of ability.
I don’t agree with this necessarily. The difference between today and 70s down is everyone fought each other. As opposed to everyone avoiding each other like the plague. If all the top men fought each other we would have very different looking records. Take our top five wins posts for example. The only relevant contender of the last 20 years is Povetkin who due to longevity and trying to get big fights has built a resume. Rest of these guys build one win into a title run. Kudos to fighting the best win or lose.
Btw the OP left off Schaaf’s win over Braddock on his list. It needs to be altered Schaaf and Braddocks totals
