View Full Version : Greater Heavyweight - Floyd Patterson or Max Schmeling?


Obama
12-19-2009, 05:16 PM
Ring Magazine 1998 Rankings had Schmeling #19 and Patterson #21. Their list:

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Evander Holyfield
4. George Foreman
5. Larry Holmes
6. Rocky Marciano
7. Sonny Liston
8. Joe Frazier
9. Jack Johnson
10. Jack Dempsey
11. Ezzard Charles
12. James J. Jeffries
13. Jersey Joe Walcott
14. Mike Tyson
15. Gene Tunney
16. Harry Wills
17. Sam Langford
18. John L. Sullivan
19. Max Schmeling
20. Max Baer
21. Floyd Patterson

Ignoring everyone else on the list, does Schmeling deserve to be rated over Patterson?

Schmeling's Top 2 wins: Joe Louis, Jack Sharkey

Patterson's Top 2 wins: Ingemar Johansson, Eddie Machen

sleazyfellow
12-19-2009, 06:58 PM
What is this, a joke? Schmeling wins by blowout...

But seriously, the low blow champion vs. youngest HW champion? please...

Obama
12-19-2009, 07:48 PM
What is this, a joke? Schmeling wins by blowout...

But seriously, the low blow champion vs. youngest HW champion? please...

You voted for Patterson....

Heru
12-19-2009, 08:00 PM
This isn't an easy pick, Schmeling's best wins far surpass Patterson's, but Floyd's substance and the fact he was ranked in the Ring's top 10 heavyweights for 15 years, 13 consecutively is nothing to be scoffed at.

Bonavena
Cooper
Quarry
Machen
Chuvalo
London
Moore
Johanssen
Durelle
Maxim
Slade
Jackson

Obama
12-19-2009, 08:02 PM
This isn't an easy pick Patterson was ranked in the Ring's top 10 heavyweights for 15 years, 13 consecutively.

Bonavena
Cooper
Quarry
Machen
Chuvalo
London
Moore
Johanssen
Durelle
Maxim
Slade
Jackson

You're listing LHW fights and guys he didn't even beat @ LHW and HW....

Ziggy Stardust
12-19-2009, 09:50 PM
It could go either way. I don't think The Ring's ranking of them is particularly out of line.

Poet

sonnyboyx2
12-20-2009, 01:03 AM
Ring Magazine 1998 Rankings had Schmeling #19 and Patterson #21. Their list:

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Evander Holyfield
4. George Foreman
5. Larry Holmes
6. Rocky Marciano
7. Sonny Liston
8. Joe Frazier
9. Jack Johnson
10. Jack Dempsey
11. Ezzard Charles
12. James J. Jeffries
13. Jersey Joe Walcott
14. Mike Tyson
15. Gene Tunney
16. Harry Wills
17. Sam Langford
18. John L. Sullivan
19. Max Schmeling
20. Max Baer
21. Floyd Patterson

Ignoring everyone else on the list, does Schmeling deserve to be rated over Patterson?

Schmeling's Top 2 wins: Joe Louis, Jack Sharkey

Patterson's Top 2 wins: Ingemar Johansson, Eddie Machen

IMO Patterson would have beaten Schmeling.. what is noticable about the Ring Magazine 1998 list is that they do not rank Lennox Lewis in their Top 20 Lewis fought a draw and got a highly debatable decision over an aged Evander Holyfield he then beat Mike Tyson who was 14yrs past his best, yet their is many English/Canadian on this forum who have Lewis a Top 3 ATG :thinking: and Lewis won a version of the title in 1992

cooper5
12-20-2009, 02:10 AM
I think this is close too. Max beat a young Louis. While Patterson was the first in history to re-win the heavywt title. Patterson fought in the shadow of Marciano and in awe of Sonny. Max won the title with a DQ win and lost it in the rematch with Sharkey. His only other title bout was the blowout rematch with Louis. Floyd made a bunch of title defences but was known for his two blowouts to Liston. I'm not sure if Max's one win over Louis is enough though. Floyd had longetivity on his side as after losing the title, fought on for nine years twice meeting Ali(once for the title). I just talked myself into changing my vote for Patterson.

The Stone Roses
12-20-2009, 04:52 AM
Floyd Patterson by a brutal left hook KO....IMO Patterson is greater...youngest heavyweight champ ever at the time....first heavyweight to reclaim the title...i think the manner in which he lost to liston and Ali damaged his legacy....he didn't just lose, he was utterly embarresed and humiliated....but taking nothing away from Patterson, its just that Ali and Liston were on another level

TheGreatA
12-20-2009, 11:01 AM
I truly believe that Max Schmeling would have been the first heavyweight to regain the title had he been allowed to fight Jim Braddock for the title.

He didn't deserve to lose his title to Sharkey but then again he didn't deserve to win it on a low blow against Sharkey either.

TheGreatA
12-20-2009, 11:06 AM
I truly believe that Max Schmeling would have been the first heavyweight to regain the title had he been allowed to fight Jim Braddock for the title.

He didn't deserve to lose his title to Sharkey but then again he didn't deserve to win it on a low blow against Sharkey either.

I also find it very difficult to pick the winner in this fight. Patterson was vulnerable to right hands, amateur Rademacher knocked him down and Ingemar Johansson knocked him out. Schmeling had a right comparable to Johansson's, perhaps less powerful but faster and more accurate. He landed his right on every opponent he ever fought.

Patterson however looked nearly unbeatable against Archie Moore and Ingemar Johansson the second time. Schmeling was troubled by the combination punching of Sharkey the first time (in the rematch Sharkey had slowed down) and Louis in the rematch. The first fight against Louis was a brilliant ATG performance though.

boxerca
12-20-2009, 04:52 PM
Max Schmeling is the greater heavyweight, in my view.

Even though he won the world title by beating Jack Sharkey via disqualification, it's still a victory. He also holds wins over Young Stribling, Mickey Walker and, of course, a very young and prime Joe Louis.

Floyd Patterson does have his victories over Archie Moore, Ingemar Johansson, etc. but feel that Schmeling's record is better. Even though he became a two-time world heavyweight champion, I still feel that Schmeling is slightly greater because of his resume.

Heru
12-20-2009, 06:22 PM
This isn't an easy pick, Schmeling's best wins far surpass Patterson's, but Floyd's substance and the fact he was ranked in the Ring's top 10 heavyweights for 15 years, 13 consecutively is nothing to be scoffed at.

Bonavena
Cooper
Quarry
Machen
Chuvalo
London
Moore
Johanssen
Durelle
Maxim
Slade
Jackson
You're listing LHW fights and guys he didn't even beat @ LHW and HW....

Take off Durrelle and Slade, since he fought them at 175 and add Dave Whitlock and Roy Harris.

From what I've gathered Patterson was on the wrong end of many dubious decisions, so they were counted also.

His decision loss to Ellis: Unofficial AP scorecard - 7-4-4 Patterson.

His decision loss to Quarry: # UPI - 7-5 Patterson; Long Beach Press-Telegram - 7-5 Patterson

His draw with Quarry: AP - 8-5 Patterson; UPI - 5-3 Patterson; LB Press-Telegram - Two writers covered the fight, Dave Lewis and Dave Taylor, who scored it 7-5 and 7-4-1 respectively for Patterson

His decision loss to Maxim: All 11 sports writers at ringside scored for Patterson.

Still doesn't take away the fact that he was ranked 15 years in the Ring's Top 10 heavyweights, 13 consecutively, during the Golden Age of Heavyweights.

sonnyboyx2
12-21-2009, 03:41 AM
Take off Durrelle and Slade, since he fought them at 175 and add Dave Whitlock and Roy Harris.

From what I've gathered Patterson was on the wrong end of many dubious decisions, so they were counted also.

His decision loss to Ellis: Unofficial AP scorecard - 7-4-4 Patterson.

His decision loss to Quarry: # UPI - 7-5 Patterson; Long Beach Press-Telegram - 7-5 Patterson

His draw with Quarry: AP - 8-5 Patterson; UPI - 5-3 Patterson; LB Press-Telegram - Two writers covered the fight, Dave Lewis and Dave Taylor, who scored it 7-5 and 7-4-1 respectively for Patterson

His decision loss to Maxim: All 11 sports writers at ringside scored for Patterson.

Still doesn't take away the fact that he was ranked 15 years in the Ring's Top 10 heavyweights, 13 consecutively, during the Golden Age of Heavyweights.

well pointed out post... you are correct in that Patterson was on the wrong end of those very dubious decisions.. Floyd is like many others vastly underestimated by many because of his loses to Sonny Liston, those who underestimate him are the same ones who underestimate Michael Spinks for his loss to Mike Tyson and claim that todays fighters like Vitali, Lewis, Haye & Wlad would also beat those two fighters in the opening round, which could not be further from the truth

Obama
12-21-2009, 02:41 PM
Here's the thing. Had all the close fights gone Patterson's way, his resume is superior. I'd rate him ahead. But they didn't. And as it stands, Schemeling's resume completely ****s on Patterson. It's not close. This comes up in the W column for Schmeling:

Gipsy Daniels *Natural Light Heavyweight
Joe Sekyra
Johnny Risko
Paulino Uzcudun (x2)
Jack Sharkey
Young Stribling *Natural Light Heavyweight
Mickey Walker *Natural Middleweight, but proven at Heavyweight
Walter Neusel
Steve Hamas
Joe Louis
Ben Foord
Steve Dudas

That's 4 hall of famers and the very under rated Uzcudun and Hamas, among others for those not hip to the game. Hall of famers are italicized.

These are not just rated fighters. You can actually get rated without beating a fighter worth a damn in your entire career. Look at some of the guys in the HW top 10 right now for proof. These fighters that Schmeling beat ACTUALLY beat people that mattered.

Then there's the other thing. Patterson in his prime ducked practically every one out there who was likely to beat him. His first reign as Heavyweight Champion was one of the most protected reigns of all time. His level of opposition was even worse than what people criticize the Klitschkos for facing today, yet he actually had great Heavyweights to defend against. He ducked Zora Folley, Cleveland Williams, Liston for a long time, and Machen for an even longer time (Machen was past it by the time they fought). Yea, supposedly he would have fought Machen earlier had Machen not had that fluke KO loss to Johansson, but he should have fought Machen before that. It's not like Machen wasn't the #1 rated Heavyweight in the world at the end of 1957 after defeating Joey Maxim twice and Tommy Jackson in the same year. Floyd's 1957 also included beating Jackson, but his only other win came against a man with 0 professional fights. This man also knocked him down in the 2nd round. :nonono: O yea, did I mention the Jackson fight was actually a rematch of a SD win he obtained a year previously? Jackson was not very good. He milked a career out of beating a faded Charles and Layne, two guys he'd never have a chance against in their prime, Charles especially.

The fact that Patterson needed a trilogy with Johannson didn't help matters either. All that did was tie the title up for 2 more years. The real fighters in the division stayed busy.

Johannson's next fight after Machen was Patterson. By the time he finished the trilogy with Patterson, Machen had fought 14 more bouts, against Folley and Liston included. Liston had fought 13 more bouts, against Folley, Machen, and Williams twice included. Folley had fought 14 more bouts, against Liston and Machen included. Williams had fought 11 more bouts, against Liston twice included. The legit top fighters of the division who actually fought the best were busy while Floyd was playing comedy with a man that retired with less than 30 fights to his name.

------

Floyd was a very exciting fighter. He had good power, incredible speed, was trained well, and always kept in good condition. But the man's skill set and chin made him a very limited fighter.

TheGreatA
12-21-2009, 02:51 PM
I disagree that Hurricane Jackson wasn't good. He was the number 1 ranked challenger at the time, can't criticize Patterson for fighting him. Jackson was a tireless machine without much boxing skill but at 6'4, 190+ pounds presented a challenge to the smaller Patterson (who fought almost the entire first fight with a broken hand).

Patterson, or more so his manager Cus D'Amato, did handpick his opponents but one must not forget that D'Amato was battling against the corrupt IBC which controlled most of the top contenders.

TheGreatA
12-21-2009, 02:56 PM
Also outside of the huge win over Louis, I don't think Schmeling's record is that different from Patterson's.

Sharkey was a fantastic fighter but by 1932 he was slowing down. Young Stribling was a light heavyweight but to Schmeling's credit no one thought Max would knock him out. Walker was a welter/middle but his gameness made him a threat at HW. Schmeling destroyed him in one of his best performances. Hamas, Risko, Uzcudun were solid opponents but not different from the many contenders Patterson fought.

First round KO losses to Louis and Gipsy Daniels should not be counted out either.

Obama
12-21-2009, 03:22 PM
Also outside of the huge win over Louis, I don't think Schmeling's record is that different from Patterson's.

Sharkey was a fantastic fighter but by 1932 he was slowing down. Young Stribling was a light heavyweight but to Schmeling's credit no one thought Max would knock him out. Walker was a welter/middle but his gameness made him a threat at HW. Schmeling destroyed him in one of his best performances. Hamas, Risko, Uzcudun were solid opponents but not different from the many contenders Patterson fought.

First round KO losses to Louis and Gipsy Daniels should not be counted out either.

Patterson got just as many first round KO losses. Schmeling was on the slide against Louis too, Patterson was prime against Liston both times. And I'd rate Uzcudun over anyone in the win column of Patterson's resume not named Johannson or Machen. Easily. Stribling was a natural LHW but was a #1 rated HW at one point. More importantly, he beat much better fighters, prime status account for, than Jackson did. I say Jackson's not very good because I've had the displeasure of watching him fight. I was far from impressed. He milked wins over fighters better than him because they were spent. That's good enough to get you a top rating. Bernard Hopkins could completely fall off the wagon tomorrow and get beat by some random prospect. Instantly that prospect is a top 10 p4p fighter....get it?

Also Walker was far from a Welterweight at that point. He couldn't make the weight if his life depended on it. And he didn't lose anything when he went up from WW to MW.

TheGreatA
12-21-2009, 03:49 PM
Patterson got just as many first round KO losses. Schmeling was on the slide against Louis too, Patterson was prime against Liston both times.

That's why I brought them up. They're equal on that regard, Patterson was KO'd in one round by Liston, Schmeling by Louis, and Schmeling also has the embarrassing first round KO loss to Gipsy Daniels.

And I'd rate Uzcudun over anyone in the win column of Patterson's resume not named Johannson or Machen. Easily.

Archie Moore? Oscar Bonavena? George Chuvalo? Uzcudun was very good of course but I wouldn't say he was better by far.

Stribling was a natural LHW but was a #1 rated HW at one point. More importantly, he beat much better fighters, prime status account for, than Jackson did. I say Jackson's not very good because I've had the displeasure of watching him fight. I was far from impressed. He milked wins over fighters better than him because they were spent. That's good enough to get you a top rating.

Jackson lives up to his nickname in the first Patterson bout. He keeps a terrific pace throughout the bout and never tires but Patterson kept up with him with a broken hand. The rematch was no contest but then again Jackson was never going to last very long at the top, partly because he wasn't that good but also because his style was very demanding.

Bernard Hopkins could completely fall off the wagon tomorrow and get beat by some random prospect. Instantly that prospect is a top 10 p4p fighter....get it?

No one claimed Hurricane Jackson was top 10 pound for pound though. The heavyweight division wasn't in its best state in 1957 and Jackson was a legit number 1 contender with wins over Charles, Baker, Clarence Henry, Layne, Slade.

Also Walker was far from a Welterweight at that point. He couldn't make the weight if his life depended on it. And he didn't lose anything when he went up from WW to MW.

No he didn't but he didn't exactly have a heavyweight frame. He was ripped at WW and bloated as a light heavy, which is the weight he fought at as a heavyweight. Walker was as game a fighter as anyone who ever fought but his run was eventually going to come to its end and it did at the hands of Schmeling.

Patterson was about to fight Ray Robinson too but I wouldn't give him the edge over Schmeling for such a win. The big difference between the two might be Schmeling's win over Joe Louis.

GJC
12-21-2009, 06:36 PM
That's why I brought them up. They're equal on that regard, Patterson was KO'd in one round by Liston, Schmeling by Louis, and Schmeling also has the embarrassing first round KO loss to Gipsy Daniels.



Archie Moore? Oscar Bonavena? George Chuvalo? Uzcudun was very good of course but I wouldn't say he was better by far.



Jackson lives up to his nickname in the first Patterson bout. He keeps a terrific pace throughout the bout and never tires but Patterson kept up with him with a broken hand. The rematch was no contest but then again Jackson was never going to last very long at the top, partly because he wasn't that good but also because his style was very demanding.



No one claimed Hurricane Jackson was top 10 pound for pound though. The heavyweight division wasn't in its best state in 1957 and Jackson was a legit number 1 contender with wins over Charles, Baker, Clarence Henry, Layne, Slade.



No he didn't but he didn't exactly have a heavyweight frame. He was ripped at WW and bloated as a light heavy, which is the weight he fought at as a heavyweight. Walker was as game a fighter as anyone who ever fought but his run was eventually going to come to its end and it did at the hands of Schmeling.

Patterson was about to fight Ray Robinson too but I wouldn't give him the edge over Schmeling for such a win. The big difference between the two might be Schmeling's win over Joe Louis.
I'm going for a coin toss, I'm not a huge fan of Patterson's but am of Schmelling's. I'd say 10 fight would be as near a 5/5 as any. I think Paterson had more gifts but Schmelling was the more cunning thinking fighter

Davros?
12-22-2009, 04:06 AM
Here's the thing. Had all the close fights gone Patterson's way, his resume is superior. I'd rate him ahead. But they didn't. And as it stands, Schemeling's resume completely ****s on Patterson. It's not close. This comes up in the W column for Schmeling:

Gipsy Daniels *Natural Light Heavyweight
Joe Sekyra
Johnny Risko
Paulino Uzcudun (x2)
Jack Sharkey
Young Stribling *Natural Light Heavyweight
Mickey Walker *Natural Middleweight, but proven at Heavyweight
Walter Neusel
Steve Hamas
Joe Louis
Ben Foord
Steve Dudas

That's 4 hall of famers and the very under rated Uzcudun and Hamas, among others for those not hip to the game. Hall of famers are italicized.

These are not just rated fighters. You can actually get rated without beating a fighter worth a damn in your entire career. Look at some of the guys in the HW top 10 right now for proof. These fighters that Schmeling beat ACTUALLY beat people that mattered.

Then there's the other thing. Patterson in his prime ducked practically every one out there who was likely to beat him. His first reign as Heavyweight Champion was one of the most protected reigns of all time. His level of opposition was even worse than what people criticize the Klitschkos for facing today, yet he actually had great Heavyweights to defend against. He ducked Zora Folley, Cleveland Williams, Liston for a long time, and Machen for an even longer time (Machen was past it by the time they fought). Yea, supposedly he would have fought Machen earlier had Machen not had that fluke KO loss to Johansson, but he should have fought Machen before that. It's not like Machen wasn't the #1 rated Heavyweight in the world at the end of 1957 after defeating Joey Maxim twice and Tommy Jackson in the same year. Floyd's 1957 also included beating Jackson, but his only other win came against a man with 0 professional fights. This man also knocked him down in the 2nd round. :nonono: O yea, did I mention the Jackson fight was actually a rematch of a SD win he obtained a year previously? Jackson was not very good. He milked a career out of beating a faded Charles and Layne, two guys he'd never have a chance against in their prime, Charles especially.

The fact that Patterson needed a trilogy with Johannson didn't help matters either. All that did was tie the title up for 2 more years. The real fighters in the division stayed busy.

Johannson's next fight after Machen was Patterson. By the time he finished the trilogy with Patterson, Machen had fought 14 more bouts, against Folley and Liston included. Liston had fought 13 more bouts, against Folley, Machen, and Williams twice included. Folley had fought 14 more bouts, against Liston and Machen included. Williams had fought 11 more bouts, against Liston twice included. The legit top fighters of the division who actually fought the best were busy while Floyd was playing comedy with a man that retired with less than 30 fights to his name.

------

Floyd was a very exciting fighter. He had good power, incredible speed, was trained well, and always kept in good condition. But the man's skill set and chin made him a very limited fighter.

Patterson had a limited skill set???? i have never heard anyone say that before didnt Ali say Patterson was the most skilled fighter he ever faced? Also the reason why Patterson had 3 fights with Johansson because of rematch clauses the 2nd fight was delayed due to contractual reasons so you cant blame Patterson at all for that.
All most all of Pattersons opponents during his title reign were ranked in the top 5. It looks like you just started thuis thread to bash Patterson to be honest.

donkim
12-22-2009, 04:10 AM
Ignore dunce.He is simply lashing out at all the users who stood up and made the right choice.He say's that the resume of Schmeiling and Patterson isn't even close and yet he has Schmeiling just two spots above Patterson :rofl:




And would you like to poll the forum on who was better, Schemling or Patterson? I don't rate them far apart, #20 and #22 Heavyweights for me, but I'm positive people wouldn't overwhelmingly pick Patterson as the better fighter.



How's that poll coming along?