Floyd Paterson vs Tom Sharkey

Over fifteen Floyd takes it, you couldnt miss Tom with a punch ,and Floyd would left hook him at will. Sharkey would probably get tossed out for fouling .and if he managed to drop Floyd,[a possibility,] he would follow through and be dsq'd .

 

Quoting Jack Johnson and forming an opinion based on a mere sparring session? Yes, you could miss him and indeed there were times where he MADE people miss. His skills advanced and the newspapers noted this and in fact devoted entire articles to this fact. Go have a look (they're out there).None said that Sharks had evolved into any scientific master, but they clearly note that he learned and evolved past the wild, face-first slugger of his early years (though he could resort back to that when enraged). Go read some of the articles and round by round write ups of the day.

Your contempt for Sharkey, like your contempt for Jeffries, bleeds through clearly on all posts I've seen from you.

 

I'm not quoting anyone, though Fitz said Sharkey was as crude as a wooden bucket.

Sharkey told Ruhlin he had improved markedly since his first go with Fitz and from his saloon in East 14th st NY made this statement,"SINCE THEN I HAVE IMPROVED A LOT IN BOXING ABILITY ,AS I WILL SHOW IF EVER WE MEET AGAIN."

After hearing of this Fitz walked into his saloon and proposed a match between them.The Seaside AC put up a purse of $25,000 winner take all.Tom O Rourke ,Sharkey's manager after watching Fitz beat half the life out of Ruhlin two weeks earlier changed his mind and prevailed on Fitz to split the purse.

[ I do read articles.]

Sharkey was a dirty brawler, he fouled Everett,Jeffries,Maher Choynski,McCoy, and Jeffords.
His biggest claim to fame is twice going the distance in losing fights with Jeffries.
Making an opponent miss occasionaly does not make you Willie Pep.Fritizie Zivic said of Lamotta "you couldn't miss him with a punch". I'm sure he did not mean it any more literally than I did , but you chose to make it the line of your attack.
Just as you assumed [mistakenly ] that I was basing my opinion of Sharkey's ability on Johnson's spar with him.

That's three wrong assumptions on your part.

I always considered Jeffries the best heavyweight prior to Johnson,an opinion I have just revised I now think Fitzsimmons holds that distinction .
I don't have contempt for either ,I have contempt for the man that incessantly tells lies about them and their achievements.
Sharkey's famed durability is based on what ? Two fights with Jeffries, others dropped and stopped him and several of them were lighter men than him.

Tom O Rourke who managed both Sharkey and Walcott had to stop them sparring because welterweight Walcott dumped Sharkey on his ear.
If you think either Jeffries or Sharkey were adept defensively I suggest you take a look at their faces.

 

Reports of two Sharkey fights, with Corbett and Choynski .I think you will admit neither flatter Sharkey.

http://www.ringsideboxingshow.com/SheltonBLOGSharkeyCorbett.html



Another report of one of the Choynski v Sharkey fights, it highlights Sharkey's "disgraceful fouling" It also mentions his wild missing swings.


http://cdnc.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/cdnc?a=d&d=SDU18980312.2.75

Sharkey in action with Jeffries.

This content is protected

 

How is this relevant to what we're debating?

Which I pointed out.

So now when someone disagrees with you it's an "attack"? Wow...

You're a Johnson fan and those were his EXACT words in regards to Sharkey. So it wasn't an unfair assumption.

Maybe you don't. But anyone who reads your countless posts and threads over the years dedicated to discrediting Jeffries at every turn would have a hard time believing this. And the way you speak of Sharkey would lead one to come to the same conclusion.

And who is doing that?

No, it is based on a hell of a lot more than that. Sharkey was considered an iron man who could take a huge amount of punishment WELL before he fought Jeffries. Look it up.

No, he stopped it because Walcott, who was desperate for a big money match at the time, decided to take an opportunistic swipe at Sharkey, who was dumped but unhurt. The part you leave out (or didn't know?) was that Sharkey came roaring back and dropped Walcott for his insolence.

You dismissed Sharkey as nothing but a face-first brawler. That, among other things you've stated, tells me that you haven't studied his career in depth.

 

This is when Sharkey was a mere pup with no real reputation outside of his hometown. And has nothing to do with what we're debating anyway. So why post?

Still not seeing your point. Nobody disagreed that Sharkey had a tendency to be rough and foul opponents. Lotta fighters did back then. Mysterious Billy Smith anyone?

 

I posted these to show I've read some on the man, and to ilustrate how crude and dirty he was.

Sharkey did not have a tendency to be rough , he was a deliberately filthy fighter. A prehistoric Galento.

Twenty three, and four is not a mere pup.

 

He was not a ranking fighter when he fought his first fights with Corbett and Choynski. He was a relative unknown. In fact those fights were something of a coming-out party for him. He was still a crude, face-first brawler at that time. He would learn some tricks and some semblance of defense later on as his career progressed.

 

It's relevancy is that is shows I have not formed my opinion of him from a spar match as you stated.

If its not an attack how come you used such emotive words as "contempt and "bleeds through"?

I couldn't care less about your opinion of me you are entitled to think what you like, but be honest about it , it has coloured your post.

Many people disagree with me, I don't class most of them as attacking me though. Wow is a silly rejoinder don't you think?
I'm not responsible for how others interpret my posts nearly 19000 of them . I've several threads on the go at the minute , how many are about Jeffries?

Have you found any lies in my posts about Jeffries? If so please post them.

Here is a positive bit about him.

When Fitz's wife Rose died Jeffries sent him a letter of condolence and invited him to join his traning camp for the second Corbett fight."It will take place probably in August at San Francisco so make your way there as soon as you like ,it will take your mind off your sorrows" . Thats a nice gesture.

I'm not a Johnson fan, I think he is a fascinating man but his style turns me off.

I simply defend him from liars like Mendoza as I also do Joe Louis.

I've just named the person who tells the lies.

The fact is Sharkey was dropped by a welterweight in Walcott ,do you think Walcott would ,or could drop Jeffries?

Sharkey was dropped and stopped by a few fighters, to call him an Iron Man is seriously overstating his durability, and I don't care who says it.
Jeffries yes ,Sharkey NO!
I havent studied any boxer's career in depth .
I'm not a historian, and have never claimed any particular knowledge.

I made a reply to this thread and you came out like Mike Tyson.

I obviously rub you up the wrong way, so why not reply to the original thread instead of me?

 

Because oversimplified summations/comments like this:

would lead just about anyone to come to the same conclusion. The dismissive-ness of it isn't subtle or subject to too many different interpretations.

I have been dishonest about nothing. And nobody here has ever implied that I'm dishonest.

No more silly or childish than some of the emoticons I've seen you use. I believe you even employed this one on a couple occasions if memory serves.

:smh

Is this not silly too?

You cannot deny that you have spent a disproportionate (compared to other fighters) amount of thread and post space dedicated to disparaging Jeffries. Whether your arguments are accurate or not, it is obvious to anyone who has followed them that you have a personal crusade going on against Jeffries. Like you said, "be honest about it. It has coloured your post." The above comment appears to be an attempt to deflect from that fact. There is no other way to interpret such a huge amount of time and space that you've personally dedicated to discrediting a single fighter.

If you have a beef with Jeff, that's fine. I've got a personal beef with a few fighters myself (Gene Tunney, for example).

Nope. Inaccuracies? Yes. Lies? No.

A welterweight who could have dropped any number of tough heavyweights if he caught them unawares. It was a cheap shot that Sharkey was not expecting. If you've sparred before you know that these things happen. I've seen 170 pound men drop guys who weigh 210 during sparring sessions when the bigger man wasn't expecting it at the smaller guy decided to get in an unethical (read: cheap) dig. Things like that get you kicked out of gyms, especially if you're trying to show up the "star" fighter of that gym. Sharkey was, at that time, the golden boy of O'Rourke's stable. Walcott tried to make cheap publicity for himself to get a big fight by taking an unnecessary swipe at Sharkey.

Like I said, read the round by round accounts. Read how many crippling blows Sharkey took right on the kisser from the guys who dropped and stopped him; blows that would have KO'd other men on the spot. Read about the killing blows he took from Choynski, Fitz and Jeffries again and again and yet kept charging forward.

I don't think it's overstating, I think you're oversimplifying.

It was a simplistic reply, the likes of which I'm not used to seeing from you, whom I consider an intelligent poster. I came out more like Don Knotts with his eyes bulging in amazement than an angry Mike Tyson. It caught me off guard, nothing more.

 

I dont meant that you are personally dishonest ,you are very literal like one of my grandson's, but he is autistic.
I used that emoticon when I applied it to Mendoza and his fan worship of Jeffries. I would be genuinley interestd in the inaccuracies I have posted about Jeffries could you give some examples? If you can prove they are wrong I will readily retract them. I repeat do you think Walcott could drop Jeffries? Do you think Kid McCoy could? I consider myself both an average poster and one of average intelligence .

I like catching people off guard, it is the predictable that is boring.

 

Yeah, ''back then". By the 50's fouling repeatedly was not allowed and for good reason. Unless the old rules stood up in the 50's-60's Patterson counters him into a bloody pulp. Different eras, different styles, yet no one wants to weigh in on this. I've become sick about talking about this.
A 2000 Klit may well waste a 1923 Dempsey. But a 1923 Klit may have got his ass handed to him by a 2000 Dempsey. I could go on and on, a worthless post IMHO....

 

I respect that. There have been very few, but I did note a couple in your posts of the past. Asking me to go back and find them is asking me to do a hell of a spelunking job though. :smoke

No. Because Jeffries was the toughest fighter of the era, bar none. But I think McCoy and Walcott could drop every other HW of the time, including Jack Johnson.

Keep in mind that after getting dropped Tom continued to charge forward and take the bombs, eventually stopping McCoy. Nobody questioned Sharkey's durability after either incident.

 

I'll weigh-in (why does no one want to?). I disagree, simply because I believe Sharkey could take what Floyd dishes, but I'm not sure Floyd could take Sharkey's bombs. And 15 rounds is a long time, ample time for an ever- charging bull to land on Patterson. Sure, some rounds FP would counter Sharkey and lump him up beautifully. But he's going to have to be able to take it as well.