There have been a few threads about the implications if great fighters like Joe Louis, Muhamad Ali etc had never been born. Braddock is not one of the greater heavyweight champions, but he might still have had a considerable impact on history. Take him out of the picture, and Max Baer likley defends his title against Art Lasky, though it might have been Schmeling or Hamas. If Baer wins he continues as champion, and if he looses the title is at the behest of whoever beats him. Whoever holds the title after the fight, they are likley more active as champion than Braddock. That could send the title in any dirction. The decision to defend the title against Joe Louis was Braddock's, based on his circumstances. Another champion whether it is Baer, Schmeling, Lasky, Hamas or whoever, might have made a different choice. Thoughts?
The public wouldn't have cared if Baer had fought a circus bear,....he was ice cream and cake to the public. He would have gone on to be an extremely popular defending champion..maybe a rematch vs Carnera, maybe Sharkey,...and if he had survived to '36 and beyond, that is, if his dedication to being champion had held up, maybe even a rematch with the resurgent Max Schmeling after his ko of Louis.
The question is, would Baer have found a way to loose sooner or later? There might have been more bad luck in his loss to Braddock than people think. One scenario that sends it off at a tangent: Say that Baer got past Lasky, then X, then lost his title to Tommy Farr, sending the title to Wales? That could have thrown up a few politacal hornets nests.
if, as champion, IF, I say,...the screwball Baer decided to defend his title vs a "foriegner" with the zest he showed in decking and defeating Tommy a few years later.
