Legitimate champion or Oaf?

Braddock's claim to the championship in 1937 was stronger than Sharkey's in 1933 because everyone seemed to agree with he judges who had him a winner over Baer, who we both agree had established a strong (uncontestable) claim in 1934.
Sharkey's win over Schmeling was hotly contested.

Certainly the shadow of Schmeling hung over Louis until KO1 in 1938, and tainted his claim. But if Braddock was legit "man-who-beat-the-man", Louis deserves to be legit in that sense.

But from Tunney's retirement up to Baer-Carnera, the championship wasn't so legit, in my opinion.
The Schmeling-Sharkey fights were settled poorly, and it wasn't until Baer-Carnera that the world's two best met with a satisfactory result.

 

Yes, I just checked and Louis did lose in this era (surprised you didn't know this) but just because an elite boxer loses on a single occasion (or even more than once) doesn't mean he is a fraud, everyone has an off night or gets caught/makes mistakes, it doesn't invalidate the rest of his accomplishments. Plus the guy who beat him had quite the pedigree himself. The best in history all have losses on their record.

Carnera had the success he did against men his own size (I am assuming) because they were even more oafish than he was or less effective anyway (that skyscraper guy only had about 8 fights) - Of course Carnera's size had everything to do with his success, no sane person will argue his size had nothing to do with it, if he was average sized for the division I don't beleive we would ever have heard of him. Was his freakish dimensions not the reason he was brought to America and introduced to pro boxing in the first place?

 

Haven't voted because the poll question is bogus.

 

For me, it's quite simple.
Tunney retired. The championship was vacant.
Therefore someone had to step forward and establish a convincing claim to be regarded as a fully legitimate champion.
This didn't occur until 1934, because ....

1930 Schmeling wins "on a foul" against Sharkey .... and a rematch is expected.
Schmeling's reign is lackng in legitimacy until he faces Sharkey again. A win over Stribling (in 1931) helps but he needs to face Sharkey.

1932 Sharkey finally gets his rematch but his 15 round "win" is regarded by most as a blatant "gift". His legitimacy is even weaker than Schmeling's was.

At this point, Schmeling has probably got the strongest claim to being world's best, but Sharkey doesn't give him a rematch, further weakening the legtimacy of the title ..... Schmeling goes off and batters Mickey Walker before taking on Max Baer.

1933 Baer, up an coming and on a winning streak, destroys Schmeling.
Carnera knocks out Sharkey. Baer and Carnera can at this point be regarded as the top 2.

1934 The top 2 meet, and with a satisfactory emphatic result this time. For the first time since Tunney retired, a champion is crowned who has firmly proven himself the world's best.

 

What a lovely invitation, thank you choklab. I am starting to really feel accepted.

 

The worlds champion does not need to be the best fighter. He just needs to beat the current champion or if a champion retires beat the top contender.

Schmeling was wildly popular leading up to his championship win over Sharkey.

 

LOL. For there to be "sour grapes", I think I might need to have felt a loss or disadvantaged in some way. I haven't and truly wonder what you think there is to be 'taken on the chin'.

Your Poll is flawed, for the reasons already given and will, in itself, not reflect the truth you want to know; that being, in your own words:

This content is protected

.

You will only yield from this exercise, a couple of numbers, denoting those who are happy to select either one of the extreme views you provided.

 

Like by not starting a ridicuolous agenda laden thread obnoxiously tilted so as to help one lick their wounds and feel like they are getting something back?

Even newcomers are seeing thru the BS on this one.

 

Many people think Carnera is a ponderous oaf who cheated his way to the belt, and is therefor an obscure asterisk in the pantheon of lineal belt holders.

Look at the first 10 pages of the Bowe-Carnera thread.

Hell, 4 people voted that way already!
Legit poll.