Is Schmelling the most underrated HW?

Sicne when is fluke/freak loss an excuse? And who said so? Most admit it was a fair win for Baer.

 

"fluke" and "freak" means the results were in some accidental, or by the smallest of chances, something that occured by some strange instance of unlikely, unrepeatable luck.
That's what those words mean in this context.
And that equates to an EXCUSE, or a reason to write off a loss.

 

No one wrote this win of but IMO if they fought additional 4 times Schmeling would have won them all. Just more consistent.

 

If Ali was somehow "faded" when he fought Frazier then Louis was hardly at his peak himself when he fought Schmeling. The "golf" excuse was not a serious attempt at discrediting Schmeling's win but a response to an attempt to discredit Frazier's win over Ali. Context is important.

I do not think Louis was at his peak when he faced Schmeling though. Baer was a face first guy, the win over him does not impress me as much as some others since it was a perfect stylistical match-up for Louis. When it comes down to it, Louis at that time was 22 years old, with a record of 24-0, actually the exact same as Wladimir Klitschko when he lost to Ross Puritty.

 

Well, choklab called it a "freak loss". And I sense some support for that sentiment from others too.

Baer is 1-0 by brutal KO over Schmeling.
I don't see how anyone could extrapolate a fantasy 4-1 head-to-head score to Schmeling from that fight at all.

 

Fair enough. :good

My own opinion is that a prime Louis went 1-1 against a past-prime Schmeling.
And that a prime Frazier beat an arguably past-prime Ali.
I rate Louis higher than Ali anyway, so in that sense I feel that Schmeling's win is "better".

I've always like Frazier's performance for what it was, and showed how great he was, I think it's perhaps the greatest 15 round performance at heavyweight ever - or at any weight, and that's why I value it highly. There are others who seem to value it mostly for the historic reputation of the opponent (Muhammad Ali).

 

Schmeling proved he had a tremendous heart against Baer and took a damn good shot but there is no doubt he was destroyed by a hard hitting, strong but very limited fighter. Some loses are hard to excuse. They are what they are and they define a fighters limitations. Jack Johnson not decisively handling Hart is one. This is another.

Louis was exceptional. When he fought Schmeling he was also very young and fairly inexperienced. He took a tremendous beating himself. Max had a hard, sharp right and he hit Louis with it so hard and so often that Max wrote how badly his hand hurt .. the fact that Louis was able to come back from such a beating tells a ton about his heart.

Ali's performance against Frazier in Superfight 1 might be his all time best. After a three and one half year layoff and two fast fights in six months he was no way near ready to get in the ring against a prime Joe Frazier. He looked so - so against Quarry and terrible against Bonavena. Only the last round stoppage erased the memory of how bad he looked that night. His legs had no bounce, he got hit often and he was extremely tired. He was rushed into the Frazier fight because of money and the fact that no one knew how long he'd be able to keep fighting. The fact that he was as competitive as he was was an amazing accomplishment.

 

I've studied all of Schmeling's filmed bouts and I feel he was never better than in the first fight with Joe Louis. He even kept up a good form around their second fight, but the pressure of everything around him, most of all a determined Joe Louis's, led to his devastating loss.

Schmeling was not a man who relied on physical talents but rather his experience and intelligence. For the first fight with Joe, Schmeling had laid down an extensive plan to take him out. His handspeed, his defensive reactions, the lack of fear for Louis's punching and the always brilliant right hand over Louis's low left, they were never better than in that fight.

Schmeling in one of his fights in between the two Louis bouts:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_LIK0KywR8[/ame]

 

Not from that fight alone but from their careers very well. :thumbsup

:rofl

 

Schmeling was just unrelenting with that right...he'd used beat you to pieces with it..so very methodical and accurate.

 

Indeed, but he was turning out stellar performances at the time... from a technical and physical perspective. But recently i've come to think that a lot of Joe's best performances when he was at his truly most experienced and murderous were against the ones people call the 'bum of the month' club. He was running through top contenders like a knife through hot butter. So much so that I think the actual perception of the quality of these men as fighters was reduced to dust. Arturo Godoy for example i think would give a lot of great fighters a lot of trouble.

 

I don't see anything in Schmeling's career to suggest he could have improved much to the point where he'd be favoured to dominate over Max Baer - (a big powerful durable heavyweight who brutally defeated him) - in 4 subsequent fights.

Maybe you could argue that Baer's prime never would have lasted long enough to beat Schmeling 5 times, but prime-for-prime there's nothing to suggest Schmeling easily combats or figures Baer's style if he's up against a prime version.

Baer had a consistent run of 14 consecutive wins at his peak, 1931 - '34.
I don't see Schmeling as being far more consistent.

:good

 

Ok, I concede that Schmeling may have recaptured his prime form for the 1936 Louis fight. That makes sense.

 

Tell me how often was Baer as good against Schmeling? Not even against Carnera was he as good. And he wouldn´t be as good in the next four fights against Schmeling either. Their fight was even when Baer stopped him. Combine both and you see where I come from. :thumbsup

 

In terms of results, Baer was often a clear and devastating winner over contenders. He was in no danger of losing to Carnera.
He brutally beat Schmeling inside the distance, in the 10th round of a 15-rounder, the score cards are irrelevant. Baer had a lazy style and coasted many rounds and fell slightly behind, when he stepped up the pressure he battered Schmeling. It wasn't some fortunate last-minute rally. He never looked close to being stopped either.

Tell me how many fighters Schmeling was brutally stopped by and came back to dominate 4 times.