Prime Max Schmeling vs. Jersey Joe Walcott

The comparison of these two champions careers against led me to check the yearly Ring ratings and compare how they did against opponents ever rated, not necessarily when they fought them.

SCHMELING-

defeated 10 opponents
(Stribling, Sharkey, Risko, Uzcudun, Walker, Ted Moore, Neusel, Hamas, Louis, Heuser)

lost to five opponents--Gains, Sharkey, Baer, Hamas, Louis

never beat--Gains, Baer

split--Sharkey, Hamas, Louis (also draw with Uzcudun)

WALCOTT

defeated 11 opponents
(Bivins, Maxim, Charles, Murray, Sheppard, Baksi, Oma, Ray, Gomez, Agramonte, Johnson)

lost to 8 opponents
(Ettore, Fox, Simon, Maxim, Ray, Louis, Layne, Marciano)

never beat 6 opponents--Ettore, Fox, Simon, Louis, Layne, Marciano

split (actually two of three-Maxim and Ray, and Charles)

Totals:

Schmeling 11 wins, 5 losses, 1 draw, 7 ko's, 3 ko'd by

Walcott 15 wins, 13 losses, 6 ko's, 6 ko'd by

*The gap between the two is to quite an extent made up of Walcott fighting his opponents several times while Schmeling fought them one or two times only. This is possibly due to Schmeling defeating his opponents so decisively quite often.

Schmeling was much more consistent.

*one thinks perhaps of Walcott as the bigger puncher, but Schmeling stopped 7 of his 12 rated opponents, and Walcott only 6 of 17 of his, despite all those multiple fights.

**12 rated opponents for Schmeling versus 17 for Walcott is much closer than I would have thought going in.

***If one takes out the early losses to three rated opponents for Walcott, the gap almost disappears to 12 to 14.

 

After thinking it over,

I pick Schmeling as having a slight edge in a very close one.

 

I initially picked Walcott but after further review, I suppose its a pick 'em fight.. Schmeling was just as skilled and crafty as Walcott and both had comparable size and power. While neither man fought Joe Louis at his ideal best, I think Schmeling's first result was better than Walcott's.. Jersey fought the older more seasoned version, while Max defeated the one who was more physically primed. In either case, Max got the win. Walcott didn't...

 

EDIT ****Post relocated to correct thread****

 

Don't underestimate Sharkey's resume either. He didn't always win but based soley on name value he has one of the stiffest competition resumes ever. He fought Joe louis, Jack Dempsey, Harry Wills, George Godfrey, Max Schmeling, mickey Walker, Tommy Loughran, carnera.

He is the only man to fought both Dempsey and Louis. And then add in Harry Wills too. Plus 4 additional hall of famers

 

Sharkey was fighting top 5-10 guys in just the first year of his career, he definetly deserves a shout out for toughest comp of all time.

 

Yes I left off stribling too and not to mention Delaney and mctigue his resume is outstanding and I think in turn if people recognize that it also bolsters Schmeling's resume. Sharkey was not a run of the mill champ.

 

One thing that this pair have in common is that they were both exceptional contenders, to the extent that they would have come to our attention as standouts, even if they had never held the title.

Their respective strengths are not quite what you might expect:

Max Schmeling was ranked in the top ten annual ratings from 1929-1938, and he was beating people ranked in the top 5 throughout that period.

Joe Walcott went on a rampage from 1945-1948,where he fought and beat most of the people ranked in the top 10.

It is a testament to Joe Louis as a champion, that he forged a link between these two remarkable fighters.

 

Schmeling has the best win in Joe Louis by a country mile, even if you think that Walcott won the first fight with Louis.

Walcott has the second best win by a country mile, in his one punch destruction of Charles.

For third place you are comparing a fight with Sharkey that Schmeling should have won, and a win over Charles that might arguably have been too generous for Walcott.

Beyond that we have a mass of impressive wins over superior contenders, and it is hard to pick between them.

I might give it to Walcott for his last win over Elmer Ray, because if he had lost, Ray might have been the Walcott figure of his era.

 

Another fighter who forged a link between Jersey Joe and Max was Steve Dudas. Dudas, a heavyweight, fought Schmeling in 1938 in Germany, and fought Walcott in 1945. Dudas was stopped by each in the fifth round. After his retirement from the ring, he worked in the public school system that I attended in the 1950s and 60s. He worked as a school bus driver and maintenance man. I only talked with him a few times and how I now wish that I had asked his opinion of a Schmeling-Walcott match! He spoke more of Schmeling, remarking that he was a very smart fighter, although I would not necessarily take that as any indication of whom he would favor. His fight with Schmeling was Schmeling's last fight before his rematch with Joe Louis in 1938. It was broadcast worldwide via radio and covered in detail in the New York Times. Because of the approaching Louis rematch, any Schmeling fight would attract more than usual notice. By contrast, I found little newspaper coverage of the Dudas-Walcott fight, but the last time I saw Steve Dudas was at a local boxing show in which he was a special guest, along with Jersey Joe Walcott.

Some very good arguments have been posted here for each fighter. I have always leaned slightly toward Schmeling, but I could easily picture either emerging victorious.

 

I think that is a fair assessment janitor. I would lean towards Schmeling's victory over Walker over the Elmer ray win only because of the way Schmeling won and the fact many ppl believed that Walker was either the best or second best heavy in the world when they fought which was not the case with ray.

 

Great story jwsoats!! Thanks for sharing!