Tom Sharkey fought two distance fights with Jim Jeffries losing decisions both times. He must have been pretty tough to have accomplished that feat. I don't see how one could pick a winner between him and Floyd Patterson without viewing some footage of Tom Sharkey. Does any exist of him from that long ago? From the statistics Sharkey only stood 5' 8" tall and weighed considerably less than Patterson so that could give Floyd P. an advantage. Are you sure that this is Tom Sharkey you are asking about and not the "Boston Gob" Jack Sharkey?
I would favour Patterson, but it would not be a confident pick. Sharkey was as tough as a butchers block, but Patterson was faster and more refined. He had his sucess against punchers e.g. Johansen, Bonavena, Chuvalo. He can probably navigate this over 15 rounds.
Keep in mind that Sharkey was training for 20-25 round fights so his weight is going to be lower than Patterson's. That said, Sharkey at his best was about 180 pounds compacted into a sturdy 5'8 frame. Floyd at his best was between 185-195 pounds stretched over a 6'0 frame. Looking at pictures of both men it is Sharkey who appears "bigger" (albeit shorter)to me and much stronger. Sharkey would beat Floyd in much the way that Marciano would beat him; by chugging forward, damn the torpedoes, and battering him down in increments before finding the coup de grace somewhere mid-fight.
Patterson was never knocked out nor down after round 4/5. Depends on the rules. Sharkey´s time: Sharkey. Patterson´s time: Patterson.
