PRIME CARNERA V PRIME BRUNO?

Bruno and it would not even be close, the Mob fighter gets hammered by the jab and he could not be missed with rights if you tried, both Brunos bread and butter, easy blow out.

 

Bruno gives Carnera some rough handling in the early rounds, then runs out of gas and gets stopped late.

 

im starting to get the nostalgist sickness..uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh...Primo rnd one and 1 minute in. I take it this is what Rabies would feel like ( wheres that sig on here with the guy drooling out of his mouth witha lost look) Oh well i'll use this.....

 

Bruno's career has been subject to some bizarre revisionism.

While he was active, everybody thought that he was just hype and HP sauce adverts.

Today people are almost building him into this superheavyweight dreadnought.

 

Carnera's career has been subject to some bizarre
Revisionism.

While has was active, everybody thought that he was just hype and
Oafish.

Today 3 people are almost building him into this superheavyweight dreadnought.

Easy isn't it?

 

There is nothing revisionist about the view that the three putting forward.

While he was active, many people did not think that he was hype and oafish, as we have abundantly demonstrated.

There were two interpretations of him in his own day, and one of them survived because it was more sensationalist.

Bruno fought tomato cans, lost whenever he stepped up in competition, and then went back to fighting tomato cans again.

Carnera fought contenders regularly, and generally beat them.

Everybody wanted Bruno to succeed, and nobody wanted Carnera to succeed, but the opposite happened.

In summary Bruno was not worthy to lace up Carnera's boxing gloves!

 

But, head-to-head, Bruno probably beats seven shades out of Carnera.

 

That would be a very bold prediction, given that he generally lost when he fought at world level.

The chances are that Carnera would do what Smith did, what Witherspoon did, and what Cummings nearly did.

Beat him somehow.

 

It's not all that bold. Not if one doesn't particularly rate Carnera's punch power or throw terms around like "world level", as though it represents an immutable constant, throughout boxing history.

 

So Carnera was consistently beating world class opposition, while Bruno was consistently losing to them, but you are somehow confident in favouring Bruno?

 

I am, if one doesn't particularly rate Carnera's punch power or deem terms, such as "world level", to represent an immutable constant, throughout boxing history.

A case in point would be Witherspoon, who was light years ahead of Carnera.

 

So how exactly did Bruno do against a fat and disinterested Withespoon?

If you gave Carnera any world level opponent who cared less than 100%, then you expected him to win!

The only thing that makes Bruno a factor in this debate, is that he conforms to what certain people think that an elite heavyweight should look like!

It clearly isn't what he did in the ring!