Braddock, Baer, Sharkey and Schmeling in IBHOF, but Carnera is not ...

Baer hits like a ****ing train and that's no joke

 

The issue is not why isn't he in there as he was a very limited guy at his best despite terrific size, conditioning and heart. The issue is why are so many third rafters in it ?

 

The IBHOF is an international hall of the greatest p4p fighters ever. That means men who move up in weight and beat elite fighters who are p4p elites that are bigger. Where's Carnera going to move up to? What elite fighters were significantly bigger than Carnera?

 

Exactly. The debate should not be, well guys like Johansson are in there, so why not let Carnera in? It should be just the opposite.

The boxing HOF is enough of a joke already without letting in more of these below average champions.

 

Actually , if I thought the HOF really was an indication of elite greatness, I would say it fatally weakens it.

 

Micky Ward? 3 fights of the year. Who cares that he never got a title.
Luis Angel Firpo?

 

The alleged fixed fights, and film beatings Carnera took at the hands of Louis and Baer are reasons why he is not in boxing's liberal hall of fame.

George Godfrey ( 1920's and 1930's heavyweight ) got in recently and he was in fixed fights for sure, and about even with Carnera in terms of a career.

Give it time, Carnera will get in. The hall of fame classes have been on the weak side lately.

There is no way Braddock should be in there, but Schmeling belongs for sure. Max Bear? Barely. Jack Sharkey? I would say no.

 

What do Schmeling and Carnera have in common which Max Baer, Jimmy Braddock and Jack Sharkey don't? Legitimate wins over HOF challengers in defense of the HW Title.

For somebody like Leon Spinks, Buster Douglas, Riddick Bowe or Ingemar Johansson to dethrone a reigning champion is one thing, to successfully defend that title something else. Primo did do it twice in a shorter span of time than the interval between LSpinks-Ali I & II. If Carnera had done that at Braddock's pace, he might have had it sewn up for half a dozen years. He lost it quickly in part because he was a fighting champion defending against legitimate contenders when he did hold it.

 

That is not the point though.

Nobody thinks that a cull of fighters who have already entered the Hall is a realistic possibility, therefore the only question is whether Carnera should be in under the existing criteria.

 

Certainly, Pandora's Box opened quite early in Canastota, I believe with Norton. Maybe Ken would have been legitimately entitled to an eventual induction, but not as early as 1992.


Before the steroid era, three things could clinch induction into the Baseball HOF: 500 home runs, 3000 hits, or 300 pitching wins, along with favorable statistical combinations of smaller numbers.

Under the existing criteria for the IBHOF, as it has devolved, winning an undisputed HW title defense has become an absolute qualifier, except where Carnera is concerned [so far]. For me, that can still remain a pretext for why Primo gets in while Hart, Leon and Buster stay out.

Of course we can go back to hypothetically evaluate and cull or revise entrees of eligible candidates year by year, from 1990 onwards. [That means Hagler still does NOT get in before 1993, or Arguello prior to 1992, as those were their first years of eligibility according to IBHOF guidelines.] Such a year by year breakdown and discussion might be a useful exercise by knowledgeable and informed Classic Forum members [in theory at least].

 

I usually either agree or at least reflect on your posts as they are consistently very good but your Carnera thoughts are way off to me ... I've watched every clip of film I can on this man at length and it shows me he was not the third rater so many label him but he was very limited even at his best ... you have to admire his size, strength, conditioning, jab and of course his tremendous heart ... he grew into a decent fighter and if matched well like against a slow, 34 year old Uzcudun (in a fight in Rome no less with a favorable ref) or a light punching light heavyweight like Loughlin he can do ok .. however when matched against a Godfrey, a Sharkey on the level, a Baer, a Louis or a Hayes among many others his weaknesses were exposed. He was easy to hit. He had poor balance and a thin chin. He had very little power which always puts the Sharkey rematch into question ... basically he was not as bad as some make him but he was not a championship caliber fighter bar circumstances ..

Back to the Hall of Fame ... if it is based on great fighters , he's not in ... if it's based on other criteria, maybe ..

 

I kind of agree with this. Based on the current criteria Carnera should have been in before some of the guys currently in there. BUT, there a lot of guys in the hall that really drag it so far down now that its become pointless. Im as big a fan of guys like Miske, Norfolk, and Bivins as anyone but those guys should not be in (and you are talking to a huge advocate for Norfolk, but he isn't HOF material). Period. In the modern era basically anyone alive who is willing to show up and sign a bunch of autographs for the Brophy family to make money off selling memorabilia gets in. Its pretty pathetic.

Carnera is underrated and has at least as good a claim as several of the inductees today, which isn't saying a whole lot.

 

Agreed. Of that era of early 30s HWs, imo, Schmeling and Baer are the only ones HOF worthy.