Schmeling-Sharkey II 1932 one of the worst decisions of all time

I disagree. We all know Max was a good right hand puncher and he landed plenty and never even seemed to rock Sharkey. A lightweight puncher like Carnera ices him ? I just doubt it.

 

I disagree. We all know Max was a good right hand puncher and he landed plenty and never even seemed to rock Sharkey. A lightweight puncher like Carnera ices him ? I just doubt it.

 

From that perspective I would agree. I am still open to the possibility it was a fix. The one problem I have with the fix theory is human nature and bonds. Sharkey was an extremely close friend with Ernie Schaaf. They both learned the trade in the navy, and became fast friends with Sharkey becoming Schaaf's manager. I have a hard time believing he would be willing to accept a dive against an opponent that was "responsible" (he wasn't Schaaf had swelling of he brain going into the fight) for his best friend's death. Something just strikes me odd about him willing to do that. Unless he feared for his own safety.

 

No,Mike Jacobs the promoter offered Braddock and Joe Gould, his manager 10% of the future earnings of his heavyweight title fights for a specified number of years. Roxborough and Black,Louis's managers offered nothing.

 

Look who knows .. I find ( from what I have seen and read ) that Max was robbed .. Sharkey was just a very inconsistent fighter and for the most part was past his best once the 20's were over and likely never that great to begin with , some standout performance aside ..

 

I've always felt the opposite, Sharkey was very good, maybe one of the beat all-round technicians among the HW champions. Sure he had the odd off day but so had nearly all the champions. From 1925 when after learning his trade for just over a year he dropped a decision to Weinert until the "robbery" of Max in 1932 he only lost to Bud Gorman(avenged) Risko (split, he also defeated the Rubber man) and Dempsey in their notorious fight and on a foul to Max in a fight that he was boxing Max's ears off up to the foul. In these eight years he fought, almost always against contenders, 35 fights and beat the following;
Carnera
Schmeling
Loughran
Godfrey
Wills
McTigue
Maloney
Delaney
Risko
Gorman
Renault
and drew with Heeney and Walker.
Not that many top heavies had a more consistent run over eight years at the top IMO.

 

Problem is that his win over Schmeling seems undeserved.

How good was Carnera? who flattened him in a return.

Draws with Heeney and Walker? Look what Tunney and Schmeling did to those two.

Wills? Impressive on paper, but Wills was aging and at a career dead end, and was blown out in his next fight by Uzcudun.

Bottom line--During his peak period, he was the number four heavyweight in my judgment behind Tunney, Dempsey, and Schmeling.

 

You can argue that but up to the dubious Schmeling win in 1932 I feel only hindsight puts Max ahead of the "Boston Gob," in that time frame. Wills may have slipped but Jack did what he had to do and the Godfrey win has to have merit. Tunney's resume is pretty bare compared to Sharkey's too. Schmeling had his Gypsey Daniels and his Steve Hamas nights too, just looking for balance.
Always hard to know about Primo but not many were outpointing him back then, he could box a fair bit.

 

on Schmeling--the Daniels and Hamas losses were six years apart, practically Sharkey's whole top level career. Sharkey lost to Risko and drew with Walker. Schmeling knocked both out.

As for Tunney, one certainly can't make much of a case for Sharkey off common foes.

Weinert--lost to Tunney twice (once by KO)--beat Sharkey twice.
Risko--lost to Tunney. Split with Sharkey.
Dempsey--lost twice to Tunney. KO'd Sharkey.
Heeney--KO'd by Tunney. Drew with Sharkey.
Renault--NC with Tunney. Lost to Sharkey on disputed decision.

So Tunney was 6-0 with one NC

Sharkey was 2-4-1

 

Good post. Tunney has a decisive edge.
Sharkey wasn't as erratic as some make him out to be and he does have quality wins for sure but I would place him behind Max and Gene.
He did defeat Wills and Godfrey and fight Dempsey very tough nothing to sneeze at. He seems to have gone into a fast decline after the Dempsey bout.

 

Sharkey was erratic and he admitted it. The problem with him, and one of the reasons i cant give hime a lot of credit is he always said as long as he got paid he didnt care what the critics said. Thats a pretty damning indictment of himself imo.

 

Sharkey's prime was late 20's. It's hard to place him highly in the 30's decade of heavies. He was a very good heavyweight.

 

At heavyweight in the 20's I would probably only place Tunney, Dempsey, and Wills over Sharkey. Maybe Greb.

 

Sharkey was a 1920's fighter. Tunney and Dempsey would rate higher, Wills' resume in a bit light in the decade, Fulton, Firpo, Weiner and Norfolk the pick. As for Carpentier, Siki or Firpo ahead of Sharkey, no way. Max was a 1930 fighter, only the Risko and Uzcuden wins were in the roaring twenties.

 

Good post and valid points.