Primo Carnera vs Tyson Fury

Impelletiere wasn't ranked he had only 10 fights and had lost 3 of his last 4.
I don't think Neusel had been ranked since1933,[he fought Carnera in35].
Lasky wasn't ranked.
Haynes Louis,Baer ,Gains all beat Carnera and Sharkey split 2 fights with him.

You don't get credit for losing fights.

 

Here is my problem with what you are saying.

If you grade Carnera’s opposition based on the Ring Rankings, then grade Fury’s opposition based on multiple rankings that did not exist in Carnera’s time, then that is not fair or consistent.

I use the Ring Rankings because they are continuous through both eras, and bring an element of consistency to the table.

If you can find a different set of rankings that were contemporaneous with both fighters, that produce a result more favourable to Fury, then I would obviously accept that as an alternative position.

As things stand, the Ring Rankings back Carnera pretty heavily in this question, and I don’t think that Ring Magazine was particularly favourable to him either.

Far from it in fact.

 

I'm not using multiple rankings. I'm using one: tbrb.

Here's my problem with what you're saying, your quest for consistency has failed due to the time gap. Who sat on the rankings panel during Primo's time and who sat on I during Tyson's. Unless they are one and the same the consistency is nil.

Does Ring have any prestige now? No that I can see. Does the TBRB, yes it is the most impartial ranking organisation out there, and if those rankings are not good enough for you, then there is no point furthering this discussion.

The facts remain: primo is 6-3 with his best win over Sharky. Fury is 5-0 with his best win over Wlad. The argument that Carnera has a better resume is spurious at best.

 

Anyone using Impelletiere to boost a resume is clearly not being objective.

It is far more plausible to me that his ranking is a typo on boxrec.

 

You obviously have no problem with using people like Chisora on a losing run, and Johnson on a losing run.

At least Impelletiere's ranking was real!

 

Carnera proved he could take terrible punishment and still keep standing; Fury got knocked down by a blown up CW. Carnera could go 15 rounds; Fury was fortunate to survive thd 11th and 12th rounds against an inept and confused guy ( Wlad) who had barely thrown a lunch the previous 10 rounds.

Probably Fury wins, but it wouldn't be a PPV match.

 

Real but unjustified.

 

It's hard to give Carnera credit for getting the nod in beating bread line rejects and set ups. And Fury is still very young. We don't know how good he could be. He already has a legit win on his record that trumps Carnera's entire resume.

 

Carnera was knocked down by Sharkey whose 13 stoppage wins in 53 fights included 5 over light heavies.

 

You are not forced to do anything. It would be best using the most fair rankings available though. For me that was The Ring up until 2012. Now it is the TBRB.

I wouldn't estimate anything for Carnera's era, I would use the Ring Rankings.

Again you miss the point. It doesn't matter which rankings you use in a gap this large as they will 100% be compiled by different people. The only thing to do is use the fairest available rankings.


Well you are talking about opponents not actually ranked when Primo beat them but who had been ranked at a point in time, using that criteria Fury is 5-0.

I'm not arguing anything, I'm using the available rankings that are decided by consensus vote but much smarter people than I.

That is exactly the point, you parrot the fact someone was ring ranked as if it holds a huge prestige. But look at the case of Ray and you have to concede, as I have repeatedly said, that there is more to resume than being Ring ranked.