Max Schmeling vs Sultan Ibragimov

Uh, no. The manner in which he "won" the title, his long period of inactivity, and the fact that he didn't rematch Sharkey immediately, were ALL perceived as part of a disgrace, EVEN IN GERMANY.

Ya'll are talking about your feelings, and not history.

 

At the time the Stribling fight did a lot to legitimize his title claim, and he was considered robbed in the rematch.

 

Actually it didn't, because most pundits considered that he should have had a defense a lot sooner, and it should have been Sharkey.

 

Perception of contemporaries is nothing more than opinion, do don't act like these are any more factual than our opinions.

Schmeling defended his title against the best available contender and then was robbed against Sharkey. It wasn't his fault that Sharkey fouled him. Nor that he got robbed in rematch. Nor that Braddock didn't give him, the only credible challenger, a chance for winning the title (which would have been a given basically, Braddock would have had no chance against Max).

 

I think that the was better than his record suggests.

He paid the price for taking on Wlad first!

 

Schmeling wins this, in what would be an entertaining bout (a first for Ibragimov), but one that would end in Max earning a wide decision.

Ibragimov, too cautious. Schmeling, too much variety, awkwardness, willingness to sit in the pocket with a right hand that would land regularly and force Sultan to show his offense (opening him up to more counters).