Heavyweight FOTW #11: A Baer Bonanza

Your hypothesis raises more problems than it solves.

How are assuming that Baer would voluntarily give up the most lucrative prize in sports, at a time when he would have been a betting favorite over any potential challenger.

This seems inherently very unlikely.

So then Baer tries to throw the fight by losing a decision, which is itself inherently unlikely, fights to let Braddock survive, but breaks both his hands doing in mind you, and still gets a draw on one of the score cards!

In the absence of more evidence, I don't think that this hypothesis merits any serious consideration.

 

But is the claim he broke both his hands and four bones in his right hand in the Braddock and/or Louis fights credible?

at 11:44 today mrkoolKevin posted the following,

"In a June 19, 1935 write-up Harry Grayson charges that Baer calmly told him before the 11th round that he had broken both of his hands in the 5th round. Grayson also wrote that within a half hour of the fight, a doctor had carefully inspected Baer's hands and concluded they weren't broken."

"An August 20, 1935 article states 'Doctors in Baltimore told him what to do for the only real injury he suffered, a bruised knuckle on his left hand. He wears a special pad over it in training. He said he feels no pain, no matter how hard he hits. The article also claims that Baer had been hitting the heavy bag with tremendous power."

I found an article stating the NYSAC physician, Dr. Elliott, carefully examined and x-ray'd Baer's hands on August 22, 1935, and would submit a report on his findings to the commission on August 23. So if Baer had broken hands, the NYSAC would have been aware of it but would have sanctioned the fight anyway.

I don't find that likely. I don't think they would risk it. Boxing had almost been banned in New York State in the wake of the Ernie Schaaf tragedy two years earlier. How would it have looked if something happened to Baer and it became known he was allowed to fight when essentially crippled? Talk about putting yourself under a cloud.

Are broken hand(s) necessary to explain Baer's performances against Braddock and Louis? Baer lost to Farr who then lost to Braddock, who was going on three years older and had been largely inactive. Louis bombing Baer out in four? Baer never showed much defense which is not exactly a good weakness to have going up against Louis.

That article quoted above says "Doctors in Baltimore" which is the city Johns Hopkins is located in. Marcus has a Johns Hopkins MD saying Baer had four broken metacarpals! I credit the contemporary reports rather than those written over 70 years after the fact until I know what the documentation is for the 21st century claims.

Fix suspicions are admittedly a stretch. Broken hands assumptions seem to me to be also over the top without solid documentary evidence.

 

Sorry for the delay- Joe Louis says he was glad to read that Max was “tickled pink” that surgeons said his hands were not seriously injured in his bout with Braddock. But the negro fighter said only Max knows if his hands are ok.

 

I guess it comes down to whether you would take the casual examination of a ring side doctor, over an assessment by a specialist with an X ray machine at their disposal.

In that situation I think that I would go with the latter.

These reports are from two months after the fight, so it might simply be that his hands had healed by then.

That aside, we seem to have muddied the waters on this issue a bit.

No they are not necessary to explain these fights, but it makes his behavior in the Braddock fight especially, seem a bit more explicable.

 

Schemling lands some nice counters in the early rounds when Baer goes to the body but Baer takes it. I thought the fight was pretty even in the first half with Baer taking control in the final few rounds. I think this Baer would be a tough fight for a lot of fighters.

 

It is not a question of taking a casual examination over x-rays. It is a question of whether these 70+ years after the fact reports are anything more than hearsay. The hearsay reports claim x-ray evidence and even toss doctors' names around, but that might only mean that the original source is an expert bs'er who knew how to embellish a story to give it the appearance of credibility. The most likely original bs'er is Max Baer himself. The 21st century sources are probably just repeating the story he told.

The article posted stated that Dr. Healy said it would take 9 months for the hand to heal, so where does the two months come from. Which is it? And why see a specialist and then totally ignore his advice?

What isn't explicable to me is anyone with four broken metacarpals even considering fighting Joe Louis. None of this rings true on the face of it, and contemporary sources torpedo the whole story.

I don't think we need broken hands to explain Baer's decline. He literally went Hollywood after beating Schmeling in 1933. He pulled it together to beat Carnera in a sometimes impressive but often sloppy performance. He was still young, but his record from then on is unimpressive. He loses to Braddock, Louis, Farr, and Nova twice. His only wins over top men are the rematch with Farr, and his stoppage of Galento. Galento was a stationary punching bag who was made for Baer. The other major victories were over second-tier guys like Foord and the 19 year old Comiskey. The rest were journeymen or worse.

 

Thank you.

 

You never get absolute proof in a matter like this, but I would take a medical report as the gold standard of evidence.

The point where you can say "this is probably the best answer that we are going to get."

Hand injuries do heal. One of my friends broke his hand beating up his brother over Christmas, and it seems to be fine in training now.

Sometimes a fighter takes an educated gamble with an injury like that.

They think that they are over it, and they hope that they are over it, but you never just know.

I happen to think that Baer's Indian summer late in his career, has some impressive features to it.

I honestly wish that he had shown the same mindset in his prime to be honest!

 

The issue appears not to be as cut and dried as I had supposed.