Tom Sharkey -- 2 questions

I will start with your second and easyest question.

From what I have been able to gather, Corbett took Sharkey verry lightly and was proved badly mistaken. His training habbits before the fight were verry poor.

 

I think Sharkey was better than Goddard, Slavin, and Hart. Substantially better? Not likely, but Sharkey did get the better of Corbett...twice, and had some of Joe Frazier's I'm going to track you down and take you out style vs boxer movers. Corbett wasn’t the only fast boxer Sharkey beat. Sharkey also defeated Choynski, and McCoy. To me, Sharkey was more dynamic than the above four men. ( Goddard, Slavin, and Hart ). Sharkey had excellent stamina and durability as well, could hit hard, and bend the rules if he had to with the best of them.

See the above comment. Sharkey was the type of fighter who pressed the action and threw wild, but dangerous punches. His heart and will to win were outstanding. The exact type who would walk through and eventually catch up to deluxe boxer types. There is a reference to Sharkey being a Rocky Marciano type of fighter. Due to his style, Sharkey’s was likely past his prime around 1901, and really went south in his last few fights.

 

Tom Sharkey was nothing like rocky marciano or joe frazier on film. He was more like a george chuvalo. Tom Sharkey fought in a bareknuckle type style, he would get ruined by fighters post 1940 with modern styles...... sharkey did not have a high gaurd, was very stationary..his whole defense was taking punches to the head. sharkey was not a skilled puncher either, like dempsey frazier marciano were. he was tough as hell though! cant take that away!


Sharkeys lucky he ducked 6'6 denver ed martin, martin with his height and reach and skills would have toyed with him, easy decision for martin or late TKO.

 

I think you are selling sharkey a little short here (if possible for a man of 5' 8 1/2.

His general style was that of a simple swarmer but like all aparently crude fighters who did well there was some hidden method there.

I have seen footage of Jeffries and Sharkey play boxing in their 50s and like with the footage of Sullivan play fighting with Corbett you see a few subtle moves that the old film dosnt show.

The bottom line is that any knockout artist probably has a deceptively unpredictable style even if he looks crude. Even guys like Baer have a few hidden layers.

 

Solid post. Its too bad we don't have a clear film on a prime Sharkey.

 

Johnson said Sharkey was crude ,but tough,you needed to hit like Fitz to keep him off.

 

And that's a bad thing?

 

Sharkey was a crude brawler with great heart. I think Corbett at his best would outpoint him. Fitzsimmons is a class above both of them as a fighter. Goddard and Slavin both fell out of contention quickly but Sharkey did say Goddard hit him harder than any man and that includes Jeff and Fitz. It could be Goddard and Slavin being foreigners had no political protection enjoyed by native fighters like Sharkey or Ruhlin for instance

Mock Round 24, Jeff-Sharkey @ Coney Island:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROUiZnnFfAw[/ame]

Sullivan going down to Corbett:
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2yBnAfN2-I[/ame]

www.youtube.com/eslubin

 

What constantly comes up when former opponents talk about Sharkey was his prodigious strength. I think it was either Corbett or Fitz who said that Tom was "As strong as Jeffries, but in a different way. It was a different kind of strength." The man had a cast-iron jaw and was one of the hardest punchers p4p of the era. With his charging and rushing style he was difficult to fend off unless you had a big punch ala Fitz.

I never have believed Corbett's story about having a bad ankle. He made the mistake of taking Sharkey too lightly in their first fight and it nearly cost him dearly. I cannot imagine a boxer as smart as Corbett being so foolish as to make the mistake of AGAIN taking the Sailor lightly and allowing himself to go into that ring anything less than 100%. That would be beyond stupid and Corbett was, by all accounts, not stupid. In my opinion Corbett didn't have the punch to keep Tom off of him at any time in his career. He could outbox him for awhile but eventually all of Sharkey's charging and rib battering is going to slow Corbett down. Sharkey lands with more and more regularity as the bout goes on until eventually Gentleman Jim gets stopped.

Re: Denver Ed Martin. A good fighter. At the time that bout could have possibly happened (sometime between 1902-04) Sharkey was already well past it and Denver Ed would have had a shot. But only a small one. Don't forget that Martin was known for his shakey chin, which isn't a good thing to have when you're fighting a whacker like Tom Sharkey, even a past prime one. Almost everyone who beat Martin knocked him out(including Sharkey's sparring partner). I don't see why Sharkey couldn't have. Prime for prime I see him knocking out Martin within 5 rounds.

 

I like Martin. I think he's greatly underrated but I also feel Sharkey would catch up to him. After losing every round of course. I think Fitz's wizardry lay in the fact he could catch you with a short, crisp shot you would never see coming. I don't think Sharkey had the skills to cope with Fitz at any point in his career.

 

Is there footage of Ed Martin out there?

 

There is footage of him sparring Gus Ruhlin.

 

I recommend reading Sharkey's auto bio on Fighters I meet.