"you ignore Schmeling's wins over Risko, Sharkey, Uzcudun, Stribling, Neusel, Walker, Hamas" Loughran also beat all of these guys except Neusel and also beat Baer and Braddock. How much do wins, even impressive wins, over these guys prove. Carnera beat Uzcudun badly twice, KO'd Sharkey and Neusel, and had Stribling down before being DQ'd for hitting him after the bell. He didn't fight Risko, Walker, or Hamas, but Loughran did and beat all three. Lewis was a genuinely great lightheavy. Farr certainly was in the class of any of these men other than Sharkey.
Scmeling is the big winner out of this analysis. He was prety consistently in the top 5 opver a 12 year period. Sharkey suffers from the fact that the analysis starts in 1928 cutting out some of the period when he was ranked. Baer perhaps looses a couple of mentions from the fact that the analysis ends in 1939 (might correct this) Carnera is does surprisingly well. Although less talented than some of the others he was consistent and took care of business against anybody marginaly less capable3 than himself. This kept him quite high for a long time. Braddock was basicaly a flash in the pan.
Fair point, but the number of heavyweights beaten who were rated between 1930 and 1939: Loughran--Sharkey, Stribling, Griffiths, Risko, Schaaf, Baer, Levinsky, Walker, Braddock, Hamas, Impellettiere, Ettore, Walker, Godoy, Lenglet (15) Schmeling--Sharkey, Stribling, Risko, Walker, Neusel, Hamas, Louis (7) Carnera--Sharkey, Schaaf, Loughran, Levinsky, Neusel, McCorkindale, Lasky, Impellettiere, Smith (9) If Louis is removed from Schmeling's list, it would be thin in my judgement and not as impressive as Loughran's or Carnera's. by the way, Braddock--Baer, Farr, Lasky, Griffiths (4) Without Louis and with his win over Sharkey on a foul, I would question whether Schmeling's list would trump Braddock, who would also have impressive wins over John Henry Lewis and Jimmy Slattery.
Loughran beat Walker and Braddock at lhw which means nothing at hw or we have to include his losses to Stribling there also, he beat Hamas and Risko but he lost to them more often then he beat them. Loughran was quite a bit inconsistent at hw. The Stribling wins of Carnera are at least suspicious.
Walker, Braddock and Stribling were never beaten by Loughran at hw and you totally ignore the losses all those fighters had. :bart btw. when did Loughran get part of this discussion? :huh
The point could be made that some of those fighters beat more men on your lists: A. Because they lost to them previously B. Because they beat them before or after it mattered. I wouldmake the general observation that although Schmeling lost the title he was never really far behind its heals untill the second Louis fight. He achieved a certain consistency against high level opposition over a period that the others didnt. The same is true of Carnera to a lesser extent. While Braddock has a few good wins he has little longevity and less consistency. Youi include some of Braddock and Loughrans wins at light heavyweight. If you are going to do this then you should throw in Schmelings win over Adolph Heauser who I think was ranked at light heavy when Schmeling beat him. Baer and Sharkey were both ocasionaly brilliant but often erattic.
Schmeling "achieved a certain consistency against high level opposition over a period that the others didn't." What exactly does the record say about these men's records in the 1930's? Schmeling--11-4-1 (8 KO's) against all opposition--against ever rated opposition 8-4-1 (6) Carnera--71-9 (58 KO's) against all opposition--against ever rated opposition 18-8 (7 KO's) Loughran--33-15-5 (0 KO's) against all opposition--against rated opposition 19-15-3 (0) Loughran is interesting only in that he fought almost as many rated fighters as Schmeling and Carnera combined. Schmeling--lost 25% of all fights in the 1930's. Lost 31% of all fights against rated opposition. Carnera--lost 11% of all fights in the 1930's. Lost 31% of fights against rated opposition. Schmeling--won 62% of fights against rated opposition in the 1930's. Carnera--won 69% of fights against rated opposition in the 1930's. Comparing Schmeling to Carnera, what stands out is that Schmeling had so few fights, only 16 in the decade and no more than 3 in any one year. Carnera fought 26 fights in both 1930 and 1932. He lost 1 decision in 1930 and 2 in 1932. While many or most of these opponents were perhaps pushovers, Carnera was keeping quite a schedule and traveling widely between fights. A few poor performances could be expected. When Schmeling was maintaining a nearly similar pace in 1927 and 1928 he too came a cropper with a one round upset knockout defeat to Gypsy Daniels.
How would you guys rank Lewis without the Tyson win? (I don't say that the win over a shot (but still dangerous) Tyson is the only good win of Lennox, far from that, but it added to his legacy a lot)
