Baer

Silly response. Article is as stands. Sportswriters credited Max with at least eight rounds.

Unless you have data that can conclude this statement is wrong....step to the rear.

 

This boxing card involved over 70 boxers. It was a major event. I would expect many sportswriters were in attendance.

 

Can anybody find an article that makes a case for Uzcudun having won?

 

This book quotes two Spanish media sources that allegedly considered the draw to be an outrage:

https://books.google.com/books?id=E...Ac#v=onepage&q=Uzcudun schmeling draw&f=false

 

That is commendable.

You have posted sources available to you, that contradict your position.

 

Eliminate the Sharkey and Uzcudun decisions and make them wins and Schmeling would be something like 19-2 the 20 or so bouts prior to Louis 2. Plus being hwt champion for a longer period of time.

 

As an example, the aforementioned Schmeling-Sharkey bout.

Associated Press: "A poll of newspaper opinion showed a big majority convinced Schmeling should have received the decision and kept his title. Twenty-three out of twenty-five writers, in an Associated Press roundup, showed a consensus of eight rounds for Schemling, six for Sharkey and one even."

How did they come up with those numbers? Here's a list of votes I compiled using primary and secondary sources:

Schmeling: (25)
Ed Hughes (Brooklyn Eagle)
Hype Igoe (NY Journal) 7-6-2
W.S. Farnsworth (NY Journal) 8-4-3
J.P. Dawson (NY Times) 9-5-1
Alan Gould (AP)
Harry Saltzinger (Detroit News)
James L. Kilgallen (INS)
Paul Gallico (NY Daily News)
Westbrook Pegler (Chicago Tribune)
W.O. McGeehan (NY Herald-Tribune)
Richard Vidmer (NY Herald-Tribune)
Francis Albertanti (NY Evening Graphic) - Schmeling by a round
Damon Runyon (NY American)
Stuart Cameron (UP)
Wilbur Wood (NY Sun) 10-3-2
Joe Vila (NY Sun) 10-3-2
Harry Grayson (NY World-Telegram)
Joe Williams (NY World-Telegram)
William Morris (NY Evening Post)
Tim Byrne (NY Evening Post)
Jack Kofoed (NY Evening Post)
Gene Tunney (INS)
Frank G. Menke (INS)
Grantland Rice (NANA Inc)
Robert Edgren - 8-5-2

Sharkey: (15)
Ed Forbes (Brooklyn Eagle, referee)
"Bugs" Baer (NY American)
George E. Phair (NY American)
Jack Cuddy (UP)
Davis J. Walsh (NY Evening Graphic) 7-5-3
Bill Cunningham (Boston Post)
Burt Whitman (Boston Herald)
W.A. Hamilton (Boston Herald)
David Egan (Boston Globe)
Edward J. Neil (AP)
Sid Mercer (NY American)
Bill Corum (NY Journal)
Dan Parker (NY Daily Mirror)
Marty Berg (Bronx Home News)
Ralph McGill (Atlanta Consitution)

draw: (3)
Murray Lewin (NY Daily Mirror)
Francis Wallace (NY Daily News)
Boston Traveler

 

Earth to Senya

Unless you know who they polled your listing of SELECT Sportswriters is meaningless.

 

25-15-3

Decidedly in Schmelings favor.

 

Thanks but I never took a position on this one.

 

Schmeling-Uzcudun, United Press report:

Taking advantage of his 20-pound pull in weights, Paulino rushed out of his corner at the opening gong and launched a slugging barrage at the German's head and body. His aggressiveness won the first two rounds. Schmeling rallied to win the third with effective counter punching
They fought on even terms in the fourth and fifth, but Maxie took the aggressive in the sixth and shook up the Basque with several smashing long range blows to the head.
Paulino battered Schmeling's body in the seventh and resumed this work in the eighth until a whistling right hook gashed his left brow. A long right gashed Uzcudun's left cheek in the ninth and he was bleeding profusely from both cuts, but still fighting savagely. He held his own in the tenth.
Paulino fought desperately in the last two rounds and jolted the former champion several times with stiff hooks to the chin. The Basque's final rally apparently gained him a draw.


Do you see any margin for Schmeling here?

 

The point is quoting AP supposed "consensus" of opinions is usually BS. They make these numbers up a lot of times. 25-15-3 is very much different from their 23 out of 25 voted for Schmeling, don't you think? Same about it being a "consensus" of 8-6-1 by rounds, plain BS that they made up.

 

Edward J. Neal of the Associated Press wrote that "to a wide majority of the critics, it seemed that Schmeling had earned the right to retain his crown, even if not by any great margin."

Headlines in multiple newspapers:

MAJORITY of experts favor the loser.

 

Does not matter. The point is was this decision HIGHLY questionable? The answer is YES. VAST MAJORITY felt the decision was wrong. Headlines in most newspapers I've seen state it was a questionable decision at best.

 

I'm not questioning that Schmeling deserved decision in the opinion of the majority of sporting writers. I'm saying I'll ask exact votes any time the AP claims "consensus" or "majority" of opinions favored such and such decision. Because they had a long history of making BS claims about these "consensuses". Now we have the AP and two Spanish newspapers for Schmeling, the UP a draw. I'd like a few more before I make up my mind whether it was a robbery or not.