I'm a bit confused to this, he beat Fitzsimmons by DQ for the belt in 96, but never defended it and just 4 months later Fitzsimmons knocked out Corbett for the belt to make him a 2 time world champion. Why did Sharkey not get a chance to defend his belt? he didn't lose up until the Jeffries fight and he remained fairly active. Does anyone have any insight on this? Wikipedia states "On December 2, 1896 Sharkey fought a controversial battle with future heavyweight champion [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Fitzsimmons"]Bob Fitzsimmons[/ame]. In the eighth round Fitzsimmons dropped Sharkey, and appeared to have won the bout. The referee, famed lawman [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyatt_Earp"]Wyatt Earp[/ame], inexplicably disqualified Fitzsimmons and awarded the bout to Sharkey on an alleged foul. The bout had been billed for the heavyweight championship of the world, as it was thought that the champion, James J. Corbett, aka Gentleman Jim, had relinquished the crown. Accordingly, Sharkey then claimed the title. The claim evaporated when Corbett resumed his fighting career, and continued to be recognized as champion until he was knocked out by Fitzsimmons in a title bout" So is Sharkey not regarded as being a world champion due to Corbett coming out of retirement?
Fitzsimmons wasn't an actual heavyweight champion at the time, only claimed to be one until Corbett were to face him. Sharkey's title claim after the "win" over Fitzsimmons would have been extremely weak so he left it be.
Sharkey did have a title claim, but owing to the circumstances of the fight it received little credibility and evapourated whn Corbett came out of retirment. Title claims stand or fall on public aceptance, and it is not hard to see why this one did not gain momentum.
It would be a big stretch to call Maher a heavyweight champion for beating O'Donnell. I understand that Corbett may have acted like he wasn't going to fight again but he came back as the recognized heavyweight champion to face Fitzsimmons. I'm sure though that Sharkey, Maher and Fitzsimmons pre-Corbett were every bit as worthy of being called a "title holder" as a lot of heavyweights in recent times.
I think that his claim is probably as good on paper as Marvin Hart's (baring the corupt officiating). A good analogy would be Vitally Klitschko after the Sanders fight (if the result had been tainted), then Lewis makes a comeback and looses to Sanders, who is then generaly recognised as the champion.
I think it's unfair that corbett officially retired and then changed his mind altho in the meantime a new champ had been crowned. Then again it's a product of the times and I can appreciate the lineage.
