Better resume - Jack Sharkey or Max Schmeling

There's a few inaccuracies here. Wills was certainly not "way over the hill". He had reached the end of his rope as a top fighter in the division, Sharkey was the fighter that initiated his rapid decline. Past prime? Certainly. Way over the hill? Not yet.

Carnera did not knock Sharkey down multiple times. He got brutalized by Sharkey in the first fight. The only time Sharkey went down against Carnera was when he was knocked clean out.

Uzcudun was a good win the first fight but the last ones were 2 out of his last 3 fights. He was even older against Schmeling for the last 2 than Wills was when he fought him.

 

Wills had about 5 more fights. None of which were significant. The point I was making was Uzcudun was old and over the hill when he fought Schmeling 2 out of 3 times.

Idk what radio broadcast you were able to hear but a significant portion of the second fight is on youtube. No knockdowns prior to the knockout nor in the newspaper accounts can I find anything of Sharkey being knocked down. Only him completely dominating Carnera until the knockout. The first fight was indeed a points decision but none the less Sharkey grinded Carnera the entire fight.

Uzcudun was not much in the 1930s. He never cracked the top 10 and was never even considered a legit contender for the title during that decade when Schmeling fought him. Again, Louis fought him in literally his last fight. Uzcudun was far over done.

 

Timestamped for the bit where Sharkey goes down before the KO of the Carnera fight :

This content is protected

Maybe a slip, maybe he was pushed more than punched. That's probably what the radio broadcast mentions though.

 

Yeah like I said I was talking about Uzcudun's win over Wills and not Sharkey's as a reference for Uzcudun being old during the last two Schmeling fights much the same way as Wills was old for the Uzcudun fight. I'm sorry but Uzcudun was NOT one of Louis' best wins prior to Schmeling.

Uzcudun was always a very tough nut to crack but at the point Schmeling beat him in the 30s and even drew with him I don't for one second think he was capable of beating the best legitimate contenders of the day: Carnera, Baer, Schmeling, Louis, Braddock, Tommy Farr, Nathan Mann.

The footage of the second Carnera-Sharkey fight show a pretty one sided display aggression from Sharkey but in the 6th round Carnera turned it up and caught Sharkey with punches that hurt him then pretty soon the one that put him out cold.

 

Wills was past it for certain when he fought Sharkey. No doubt. But Uzcudun was just as bad if not worse the last two times he fought Schmeling. That's my point.

 

He was never a top ranked fighter. Not to mention he lost a split decision to Paulino in Spain so more than likely Charles beat him in actuality but he happened to be in Uzcudun's backyard. Just like Schmeling only got a draw when he fought Paulino in Spain.

 

This debate is still going on, Schmeling deserves credit for the first Uzcudon win, Paulino was on a 5 fight win streak and 6 of 7 with the loss being a DQ when they faced off, Schmeling clearly won and the winner faced number 1 Sharkey. It’s a very good win, Uzcudun was still years from being done and had a win over Baer still to come.
His “draw” with Uzcudon years later was home cooking in Spain - the sole arbiter of the bout was the ref and he was the head of the Spanish athletic commission. The decision was roundly booed in Spain the host country against a home fighter. Pretty much sums it up.
Hamas was the number 1 contender when Schmeling crushed him (ending his career in the process)
Walter Neusel was a top prospect being groomed as the blonde bomber when Schmeling popped that balloon as Neusal was coming off two wins over king Levinsky and Tommy Loughran when they faced.
We don’t have to rehash the perception of Louis when they faced off when Schmeling popped that balloon.
He crushed Mickey Walker who held Sharkey to a draw and was doing quite well in the heavy division when they faced off.
The rematch with Sharkey while dull everyone felt Schmeling should of been the victor - including the previous champ Gene Tunney who was in attendance.
Stribling was the favorite against Schmeling when he stopped him as well.
That’s wins of prime or peak fighters over Louis, Stribling, Neusal, Hamas, Uzcudon, not bad - not to mention stopping Risko who beat many fighters including Sharkey and Walker both by stoppage who held Sharkey to a draw.

 

This is not to say Sharkey was a slouch - his win over Wills is a good win. Wills was past it but Sharkey was the one to expose it.
The win over Tommy Loughran was excellent- this is peak Loughran before he started trading wins and losses with everyone.
Sharkey has a deep resume and fought everyone. His competition is better than Schmeling’s.
For me I put Schmeling above him because he has the best win and did better against common opponents.
Had Sharkey defeated Dempsey different story. Also the draw to Heeney hurts as he was passed over for Tunney.
Both guys were great fighters. Both better than Baer, Carnera and Braddock (the other round robins before Louis and after Tunney) Both top 30 heavies imo

 

I can’t go that far. Tom Sharkey is interesting but fought so long ago and such limited footage hard to assess. Carpentier no way - certainly not at heavy. Carnera is interesting because his resume is ok - but how many wins are legit? And you can’t count the Schaff win which on paper is a good win but Schaff entered the ring with the effect of spinal meningitis and clearly was big the same fighter. His win over stribling is a known dive. His win over Godfrey is suspected. Too much gray area to place Carnera accurately. Although I do believe he has been underrated by most.
Sharkey has a murderer’s row of talent on his resume - kind of like Holyfield- he just didn’t do consistently well against them.

 

no it’s not Carnera’s fault in the Schaff fight, I never said it was, Carnera doesn’t deserve blame and the tragic result of that bout troubled him deeply. However - when you fight someone - it matters legacy wise of when you faced them, like Neusal defeated scheming after the war nobody values that win the same as the pre war stoppage by Schmeling of him. Carnera faced a lethargic Schaaf whom clearly should not have been in the ring that night. So while yes not Carnera’s fault, I can’t value the win much.
As for the suspected Dive bouts, I do believe the Stribling bouts had some funny business going on, who knows. Carnera received lot of bad press so some other “fixes” may have just been affixed to his name.
As for Sharkey he was thrown in the deep water right away and had to learn his craft quickly, that’s why he racked up some early losses, like to Weinert for example. Good learning experiences against a good veteran. Once Sharkey hit his stride he knocked off lot of good fighters and was giving a good account of himself against Dempsey win or lose until the dramatic and problematic conclusion.
Tom Sharkey was a good fighter. Outside the champs I have hard time properly assessing the very old fighters - pre Dempsey. Tom was also accused of fixed fights who knows.