Primo Carnera vs Tyson Fury

Apart from Impelletiere who had exactly the record you describe.

If you aren't willing to accept TBRB rankings there's no point continuing. I've used those rankings since 2012, if you don't agree that totally your call but one I disagree with.

 

My principle is using the most fair rankings available. I've said this since the first post.

The most fair rankings in his day were Ring, I've never once disputed this.

 

OK, brass tacks then.

If we compare them based on number of opponents beaten who were ranked at some point, then Carnera could be as high as something like 15, and it would be relativley easy to demonstrate that these fighters were ranked at some point.

If we compare them based on opponents beaten who were ranked at the time, then we are likley to get a conservative figure for Carnera, because it is hard to establish the ranking of his opponents. Even using your preferred rankings however, it would be hard to prove that more than one of Fury's opponents were ranked at the time that he beat them.

Whatever system you choose, the outcome is going to be a big edge in depth, in favour of Carnera.

Perhaps this should be no surprize, given that he fought at the highest level over many years, while Fury has only recently taken the plunge.

 

Fury's resume is way, way better. Wlad alone is worth almost as much as all of Carnera's resume. Even taking Wlad out of it, Fury's probably got the better resume. Chisora and Cunningham are better in their era than any of Carnera's defeated opponents except Sharkey, Loughlin and maybe Stribling and Levinsky. But Carnera had 5 losses going into his first title match. People keep forgetting that losses count AGAINST a resume just as wins count FOR a resume. Taking Wlad out of the equation, did Carnera have more high level wins than Fury? Absolutely. But he had 5 losses to Fury's 0. Fury has the better resume minus Wlad. With Wlad, its actually laughable to even compare them.

 

An edge in depth at best, not a big edge in depth.

I do not see any way that someone can be 100% certain that Primo has a better resume than Fury.

 

I went to the yearly rankings for Carnera--this seems to be the list if I'm correct--

Wins--

Sully Montgomery
Paulino Uzcudun
Jim Maloney
Bud Gorman
Knute Hansen
King Levinsky
Vittorio Campolo
Don McCorkindale
Art Lasky
Ernie Schaaf
Jack Sharkey
Tommy Loughran
Ray Impellittiere
Ford Smith
Walter Neusel

Wins on fouls--

Young Stribling (almost certainly a fake)
George Godfrey (probably a fake-at best a win on foul)

Losses--

Jim Maloney
Jack Sharkey
Larry Gains
Stanley Poreda (many thought bad decision & that Carnera won)
Max Baer
Joe Louis
Leroy Haynes

Nothing wildly impressive. Sharkey was probably always overrated and was on the cusp of a severe decline. Schaaf was sick. Most of the other top names were on the way down,

and several were fringe conenders at best.

In retrospect, Loughran is the most impressive win.

Carnera has depth on Fury, but nothing like Fury's win over Wlad,

The future will tell. A few more wins and Fury should move well ahead. If his career goes south, folks might wonder if he was a lucky guy who caught an old champ on the right night, like Leon Spinks.

To an extent, Carnera is another who caught a fading, and never that good to begin with, champ on the right night.

 

I don't know about you ,but I'm not expecting great things from Fury.
He has good co-ordination and speed for such a big man ,but lacks top power and his chin is not great either.
Anthony Joshua and Joseph Parker may be the future of the division