Primo Carnera vs Victorio Campollo and Uzcudun I and II, footage

They were mostly third- and fourth-rate opposition.
Carnera stopped a lot of guys with accumulation. He was a huge heavy lump of a man, if he's landing any sort of punches that extra bulk he had will take its toll on the opposition, and in the clinches too. He simply drowned them with bulk and strength.
Some of them probably fainted at the mere sight of him.

 

Carnera lasted 6 rounds with Louis. At least give him credit for that.
Louis is also quoted as saying Carnera was a good skillful boxer.

 

They are no better , but are they any worse?

Furey for example was having his 16th fight against Firtha.
Carnera was having his 54th against Campolo, his 82nd against Pauilino ,see the difference?

 

Please provide a primary source for this quote.
I am not questioning Carnera's courage , just his ability.

 

Some of them fainted at the sight of the wise guys packing iron in the corner.

 

I think Carnera looks a bit better (and more seasoned) than Fury. He moved a lot better for a start, but that's just aesthetics.
Also, Fury has been boxing since he was a boy, he's had as many fights as Carnera I guess. But I don't want to judge him harshly either.


But that's not the point.
The point is, some people talk as if Carnera was just some big lump who couldn't even box or fight at all and was only successful because he had big size advanatge and/or crooked fights. They talk as if nobody like him would have any success in boxing today.
And I think that's wrong.


The myth of him being a useless lump who couldn't fight at all is even less accurate than the myth of him being invincible that his promoters were trying to create.
Wouldn't you agree ?

 

Maybe some of them did.

 

How many names do you need? Every known tank artist of that era appears on Carnera's resume, along with those fighters with dubious reps , such as Sharkey, Gorman ect.

 

Carnera should look more seasoned shouldn't he ? He had nearly 40 fights more than Fury at the time he fought Campolo.

 

Joe Louis's rating of Primo Carnera:

http://news.google.co.uk/newspapers...833&dq=joe+louis+rates+dempsey+greatest&hl=en

http://news.google.co.uk/newspapers...790984&dq=joe+louis+rates+his+opponents&hl=en

Of course the man who actually fought him in the ring probably has no clue about how good he was. It's easy for the reporters to have said that Carnera was a bum, without being in the ring with him.

 

Carnera was able to go 6 rounds with Joe Louis. He beat guys like Germany's Walter Neusel, who was too good for Britain's Jack Petersen. Apart from Schmeling, I doubt there were many in the whole of Europe who could beat Carnera at his best.
That suggest above average ability.

 

Fury had an extensive amateur career. I don't see him progressing greatly even if he has another 20-30 fights as a pro. In fact I probably see him getting knocked out.

 

Carnera had a suspect chin actually.

 

Feel free to elaborate on the "known tank artists". If they were known in that way, they must have been known to take dives against others then. Surely if they appear on other's records, you have to cast the same doubt on those other fighters.

I'm certainly not arguing that Carnera didn't have help from mobsters. I'm pretty sure he did.
But he wasn't the only one. The mobsters that owned Carnera, and their ilk, owned just about every other champion of the era.
The biggest difference with Carnera is that they fleeced him worse and left him penniless.

Carnera certainly looks competent enough on film to have not needed all his fights against 4th-raters to have been fixed. That's my best guess anyway.

 

I don't put much stock in amateur fights, and I'm no big fan of Fury's, but comparing a 14 fight pro with a 53 one is a trifle disingenous don't you think?