How well does a 1935 James J. Braddock do against the following

To be fair to Schmeling, most of his knockout losses were pretty early on in his career. Between 1929-1937, Schmeling fought most of the high calibre talent out there without being finished or in trouble, besides Baer. He took some solid shots from Louis in their first encounter (and I personally feel like the early finish of their second match had more to do with Schmeling’s back being destroyed than Louis’ finishing ability), and even took some some from Baer for a good number of rounds before being stopped. I wouldn’t say Schmeling was chinny, or not chinny enough for someone like Braddock to capitalize on.

 

Fair points all. Like I said, I wouldn’t pick Braddock to beat Schmeling. Max definitely would be the favorite. I’m just saying we think a lot of things nowadays and we’re not always right. Same thing back then. There’s a reason why Braddock was a huge underdog against Baer, rightfully so. And yet, Braddock beat Baer and decked a sharp Louis. What might he do with Schmelimg?

 

Jim Braddock gets dismissed as pretty much compost here, but IMO he was an excellent prize fighter who at his absolute peak could beat anyone on this list except Marciano. Notice I said "could" not "would." And I have zero illusions about his historical status. But he was not compost.

 

Hey Seamus

 

I remember when you wrote a scathing rebuttal of the video that reznick made on Braddock

 

You can say that Braddock would have beaten Tyson on June 27 1988 because unpredictable things happen in boxing

 

Yes but I gave my reasons why a Braddock win over Schmeling certainly was not out of the question. See prior posts. Schmeling would be the favorite, but I don't think a heavy favorite. Not given that Braddock beat Baer, who beat Schmeling, Braddock had a known excellent chin, Schmeling had been decked and stopped several times in his career, and his pace wasn't necessarily blistering. Schmeling didn't have an easy time of it with Stribling or Sharkey either. There was no truly great standout amongst those champions of the late 20s to mid 30s, post-Tunney and pre-Louis. All good, solid guys, but not special, so I could see them doing a round robin and having a lot of parity. Heck, I wouldn't even be shocked to see a Carnera doing better with some of those guys than some might think, given his size, reach, power. He could either get outboxed or beaten up, or he could could administer the beating. Not a given that Schmeling beats him either.

 

Yes, more of a rebuttal of silly videos cherry picking isolated moments where a fighter looked good to give the false impression that thats how they always looked when the opposite is true. That being said Braddock was not a very good fighter at all. His best wins were not without some controversy in his favor snd even his KD of Louis which much is made of occurred when Louis was going in for the kill while Braddock was trapped on the ropes and Louis squared up. The KD was s total balance shot, not like he actually hurt Louis. I have zero doubt that all of these guys would beat Braddock and I dont think it would take the best version of each to beat the best version of Braddock.