Jack Sharkey v. Chris Byrd

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by mrkoolkevin, Apr 12, 2021.

  1. janitor

    janitor Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    65,432
    14,650
    Feb 15, 2006
    Obviously Sharkey was not the most consistent quantity, but at his best I think he was a little bit better than Byrd.
     
  2. Kamikaze

    Kamikaze Stud Pony Full Member

    2,562
    2,769
    Oct 12, 2020
    Nope, Hell Byrd would most likely lick Dempsey.
     
    Seamus, GOAT Primo Carnera and Pat M like this.
  3. mrkoolkevin

    mrkoolkevin Never wrestle with pigs or argue with fools Full Member

    18,111
    8,721
    Jan 30, 2014
    What would Sharkey's advantages be head-to-head, in the ring? What does he do better than Byrd?
     
  4. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    42,383
    7,199
    Jan 3, 2007
  5. 70sFan865

    70sFan865 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,847
    6,009
    May 30, 2019
    Sharkey lacks reflex? Are you sure we're talking about the same fighter?
     
    BitPlayerVesti likes this.
  6. janitor

    janitor Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    65,432
    14,650
    Feb 15, 2006
    They are both defensive specialists, but Sharkey is clearly better on offence, and the better finisher.

    When two defensive guys go at it, often the man with the better offence carries the day.
     
  7. janitor

    janitor Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    65,432
    14,650
    Feb 15, 2006
    Seems a bit of a reach.
     
  8. 70sFan865

    70sFan865 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,847
    6,009
    May 30, 2019
    He's better pressure fighter and has better head movement. Byrd is better defensively in my opinion and more consistent overall.
     
  9. Kamikaze

    Kamikaze Stud Pony Full Member

    2,562
    2,769
    Oct 12, 2020
    Byrd is bigger then Jack, more skilled then anyone Jack faced he is also a southpaw and one of the most durable and skilled defensive wizzes at HW ever.
     
    Pat M likes this.
  10. 70sFan865

    70sFan865 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,847
    6,009
    May 30, 2019
    I don't think he's more skilled than Schmeling. They are much different fighters, but Max was at least comparable.
     
    RockyJim likes this.
  11. RockyJim

    RockyJim Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,467
    1,228
    Mar 26, 2005
    It's the new generation...."size" is the deciding factor in the victory...not talent...not experience....but "size"!
     
  12. janitor

    janitor Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    65,432
    14,650
    Feb 15, 2006
    I find it decidedly odd that people are making the argument for Byrd based on his size.

    This is a guy who made the LHW limit at the age of 37.

    The only way Byrd's size is going to be a factor, is if you match him against somebody much bigger.

    As for the rest, Byrd was a brilliant defensive fighter, but he couldn't hit hard enough to crack an egg.

    Fighters like that sometimes beat the kings of the heavyweight division, but they never seem to end up wearing the crown.

    Every lineal heavyweight champion in history, has probably had at least average power for their division.
     
    BitPlayerVesti likes this.
  13. Kamikaze

    Kamikaze Stud Pony Full Member

    2,562
    2,769
    Oct 12, 2020
    Wrong Jack!
     
  14. Kamikaze

    Kamikaze Stud Pony Full Member

    2,562
    2,769
    Oct 12, 2020
    Off topic, changes nothing he held the weight better to perform regardless of his frame he would beat the living hell out of Dempsey, pillow fisted or not pillows can still suffocate people Jan.
     
  15. BitPlayerVesti

    BitPlayerVesti Boxing Hagiographer Full Member

    7,049
    8,240
    Oct 28, 2017
    Not to mention that Byrd himself has argued against size being that important