Schmeling vs Fitzsimmons

Interesting one.

During Schmelings career, nobody would have given him a chance before he beat Louis, and even after that most might have picked Fitzsimmons.

Today many people (including some not normaly complimentary towards Schmeling) will pick Schmeling solely on the basis that he fought in a later and therfore more technicaly advanced era.

 

This is silly, you can't match people against Fitz - you know what happens.

Seriously this is a good match. Fitz is vulnerable to Schmeling's tasty right, but he has great resolve and is a wicked counter-puncher himself. Fitz had two types of fighting where he could sit on the back foot and wait for the right moment or go towards his man and take him out with a two-fisted assault.

I fancy a fight against Schmeling to play out rather cautiously but do favour the superior cunning of Fitz to out-feint Max at a vital point and take him out or at least render him senseless with a typical Fitz hook from hell.

 

Shemmling by midround stoppage.

 

For my money, if you are ranking heavyweights from every era based on acomplishments, at that weight, then these two fighters should not be verry far apart.

They should probably be within 5-6 places of eachother either way.

Anybody see a huge gulf between their acomplishments at heavyweight?

 

I think Fitz was a much better , more consistant fighter but an A game Schmeling would be a challenge. Max knew how to box and show restraint. He would not come out and slug with Fitz which would be suicide. He would bax and be a difficult challenge. Max also took an incredible punch so he'd hand in there. I like Fitz by decision or late stopage but it would be far from easy ..

 

Schmeling.

 

McGrain having the attitude of a cheeky teenager here. :rofl

 

I seriously considered responding to that with another "Schmeling." but decided it'd be in the boards best interest to not have a 300 page thread of nothing but "Fitz." "Schmeling." back and forth.

 

Fitz

 

:lloll