Poll: How good was Primo Carnera?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by reznick, May 24, 2017.


How good was he?

  1. He was a fraud bum.

    7.9%
  2. He was a fraud journeyman

    16.9%
  3. He was a good fighter

    65.2%
  4. He was an ATG

    3.4%
  5. He was an elite great

    6.7%
  1. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,623
    Mar 17, 2010
    How good was Primo Carnera?
     
    GALVATRON likes this.
  2. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    79,882
    20,451
    Sep 15, 2009
    Should be an option for an elite fighter who fell short of greatness.
     
    InMemoryofJakeLamotta likes this.
  3. Contro

    Contro Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,882
    4,690
    Jun 7, 2016
    Reznick can we clarify this thread is ONLY about his ability in his prime? Not his legacy/achievements?
     
  4. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    27,669
    7,628
    Dec 31, 2009
    NoBody would pick the first two. This is more like it. Primo was at one time, if only for a day, genuinely the best in the world. Really.
     
    RockyJim likes this.
  5. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,623
    Mar 17, 2010
    I think we are judging him based on or around his prime.
    And I'm starting to realize that it's hard to ignore achievements when assessing abilities.
    At some point you have to talk about who he used his abilities against, how good they were, etc.
     
  6. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,623
    Mar 17, 2010
    You guys think there should be an option between "Good" and "ATG"?
    Like "Championship level boxer" or something?

    Or is it just fine the way it is?
    Are there non ATG fighters who won the lineal title and defended it at least once?
     
  7. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,199
    26,485
    Feb 15, 2006
    He essentially sits in his own category for the era.

    He was not as good as Schmaling, sharkey or Baer, but he was significantly better than anybody else around.

    Louis

    Schmeling, Sharkey, Baer in whatever order you prefer.

    Carnera

    The rest
     
  8. KuRuPT

    KuRuPT Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,462
    2,811
    Aug 26, 2011
    I would choose the option... "Limited Champion"
     
  9. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    27,669
    7,628
    Dec 31, 2009
    If I had to (and I don't, my poll clears everything up) I would have:

    1,Fraudulent oaf

    2, legit but No better than journeyman

    3, legit World level

    4,legit and Good enough to be champion

    5, All time legend.
     
  10. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,069
    27,896
    Jun 2, 2006
    I dispute that he was better than
    Schaaf who beat ;
    Poreda
    Uzcudun
    Loughran
    Renault
    Braddock
    Baer
    Stribling
    Galento
    I dispute that he was better than Larry Gains who beat him.
    I dispute that he was better than
    Johnny Risko who beat:
    Baer
    Levinsky
    Heeney
    Maloney
    Griffiths
    Loughran
     
  11. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    27,669
    7,628
    Dec 31, 2009
    you don't know if Primo wasn't better (over all) than Schaaf, Risko and Gains?
    But Primo himself beat Schaaf.

    Primo beat Neusel, chuck wiggins and don mckorkindale who all beat Gains.

    Primo beat Nattie brown, laughran, Jim maloney who all beat risko
     
  12. Reinhardt

    Reinhardt Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,382
    17,939
    Oct 4, 2016
    Well according to many posters on these forums he should be the greatest heavyweight of his era due to his height and size. But, Baer almost killed him and nobody accused Baer of ever being slick. He's a bottom tier heavyweight champion
     
    mark ant, ETM and joe brown like this.
  13. mrkoolkevin

    mrkoolkevin Never wrestle with pigs or argue with fools Full Member

    18,440
    9,555
    Jan 30, 2014
    Perfect.
     
  14. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,199
    26,485
    Feb 15, 2006
    We would have to rank him above these men because:

    A. He won the lineal title which none of them did.
    B. He established himself as the outstanding contender which none of them did.
    C. He surpasses all of them in terms of depth of opposition.

    I am impressed by Schaff, but he died at a fairly critical point in the timeline, thus preventing him from advancing further.

    Risko and Gains never really distinguished themselves from the other contemporary contenders.

    the rest is history as they say.
     
    choklab likes this.
  15. Bukkake

    Bukkake Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,482
    3,689
    Apr 20, 2010
    He surpasses Risko in terms of depth of opposition?