Better All-Around Fighter: Primo Carnera or Riddick Bowe?

Primonised.

 

A prince among men.

 

Say less

 

He should be in the Hall of Fame for sure.

That fight I would get behind!

 

Fixed it for ya

 

is this trolling?primo was the worst heavyweight champ i have ever seen.slow,flat footed,no balance,cant throw a decent jab,weak chin and nonexistent defense.

 

Wash your mouth out! This is sacrilege!

 

You know nothing.

 

"He defeated Tommy Loughran by stepping on his feet and outboxing him, when by all the laws of common sense, he should have destroyed him completely. And he earned his chance at Jack Sharkey's championship by catching poor Ernie Schaaf more dead than alive and pushing him into eternal darkness with a mild shove in the cheek" https://www.newspapers.com/clip/73525973/the-wilkes-barre-record/

"from the ringside these blows (ernie's) seemed to have little force behind them" https://www.newspapers.com/clip/73526082/the-decatur-daily-review/

"schaaf landed scarcely a blow while carnera seemed to be hitting almost at will" https://www.newspapers.com/clip/73525239/the-morning-call/

"Dr. Charles W. Norris, chief medical examiner of the city, today said that death of Ernie Schaaf resulted from natural causes and not from any injury received in Schaaf's bout with Primo Carnera last friday night" https://www.newspapers.com/clip/73526936/kenosha-news/

We have all these doctors, medical experts and examiners who actually performed an autopsy, and people who actually saw the fight in it's entirety who concluded Schaaf was seriously unwell and should've never been in the ring that night. On the other hand, we have you, a liar with a long list of dishonesty that stretches literally over a decade, who's seen but a couple minutes of the fight.
Hmmmmm this is a tough one I don't know who to believe.

 

more then you definitely

 

*Clears throat*

 

Little did he know there was over a hundred pages to follow.

 

I am not into comparing Carnera to Bowe, but that first quote is interesting as it is so misleading about the gist of the article, which was entitled "Critic Marvels over Carnera's Real Power" and includes this section, and I would advise reading the whole article.

"He is the biggest fighter to ever hold the championship. He is by all odds the most powerful, and by the admission of the smart boys one of the two or three fastest and cleverest. Not since Jim Corbett has a man carried the sheer speed into a heavyweight fight that this Italian freak carries. Even Tunney, for all his admitted science was not as fast with his hands and feet as Carnera. Loughran, Sharkey, Tom Gibbons, Jack Johnson--none of them carried the sheer speed of hand and foot Carnera has."

Tunney? Johnson? The smart boys?

My concern is history and what was true about Carnera, and pointedly, how he was viewed in his own time? To me, this article is way over the top, but this writer certainly didn't view him as a helpless oaf.

Edward J Neil, in a separate article, stated that Baer's only chance seemed to be an early knockout. Otherwise Carnera would outbox him and wear him down.

The odds on the fight are stated as Carnera being a 7-5 favorite.

I have no interest in Carnera in the modern world, just how he was generally viewed in his own era. And it does appear to me that many viewed him much more positively than modern critics would admit.

*I have never noticed any noticeable hand speed from Carnera, but he was fast and agile on his feet.

 

Laughed out loud and stopped reading at this point.