Schmeling vs Fitzsimmons

I think Fitz is probably a better fighter overall, and may very well have beaten Max on most nights of his career. On the evening that Schmeling beat Louis however, he would have been an extremely formidable foe. I wouldnt' be surprised if these guys both had some wins and losses had this match turned into a series of meetings.

 

Fitz was the better fighter pound-for-pound, but Schmeling was the better heavyweight. He holds arguably the greatest win in heavyweight history. Much as I like Fitz (AND think that he was the better feinter, thereby giving Schmeling fits, no pun intended), I have to go with Schmeling.

 

I'm interested in your opinion on this Cross_trainer.

We know that both men could punch, but both were intelligent fighters as well. Do you see this as being more of a chess match, or a slugfest that ends early?

 

Much depends on which approach Schmeling chooses to adopt. Max thrived on subtleties--as did Fitz, for that matter--and we simply don't have the film quality to see the nuances in Fitz's style that he would exploit. I suspect that it would be a counterpunching nightmare of a fight to watch, but that Schmeling would get the better of it and land a barrage that puts Fitz down for the count.

Schmeling would be the largest skilled big man with a punch that Fitzsimmons faced, and under 1950's rules Schmeling would be fighting much closer to his comfort zone. I also suspect that Schmeling's crouch would trouble him as Jeffries' did, except that Schmeling was a more sophisticated puncher at that stage of his career. Fitz probably won't knock Schmeling out; he took massive punishment from Baer before succumbing, and actually weathered Louis's storm in the first fight.

 

Thanks for your insight. It sounds like a reasonable outcome.