Better All-Around Fighter: Tony Galento or David Tua?

For this to be true suggests Nova is a better fighter than anyone Tua beat, which obviously isn't true.

It also suggests tua couldn't replicate the accomplishments of galento which is equally false.

 

Well when you have an agenda and your head up your ass, you're bound to say ridiculous things instead of just admitting your proposition is ridiculous.

Anyone who writes that they'd steer holyfield away from a firpo fight due to the "danger" (despite his success against sluggers who were 10x the boxer firpo was) is either a moron, a troll, or both.

 

It doesn't necessarily suggest either.

Tua's win against Ring ranked opponents is very thin.

Nova was the #1 contender when Tony beat him, which makes it a better win on paper, than anything on Tua's record.

That has to at least throw the question open, in terms of who has the best resume!

Incidentally, I am surprised that Galento did as well as he did in his era, and surprised that Tua did not do better in his!

 

Nonsense.

Tua kod moore, Ruiz, and Rahman. Unless you think that the Lou Nova whom Galento defeated was a better boxer than the 3 boxers i listed tua defeated, your argument doesnt make sense.

Having a #1 ranking only carries weight if the boxer who holds that rank would be favored skill and/or h2h wise over the best wins of another boxer. Is that fair?

For the record, I have Rahman in my top 50 both h2h and in terms of resume. Nova isnt sniffing top 50 on either of my lists, and he's only 1 of the 3 of the best boxers Tus stopped.

 

Nova was certainly better than that version of Ruiz.

I guess that we have to rank Rahman more highly than Nova, if only because he won the lineal title.

If you are comparing resume, then a win over a #1 contender is something tangible, however good/bad the era.

Rahman is pretty beatable, and not terribly consistent, so I wouldn't make him a prohibitive favourite over Nova.

Nova was pretty good.

You could make a case for him being among the better contenders never to hold the title, and people other than me have done so.

He certainly had no business losing to a guy like Galento.

For contrast, I feel that Tua could and should have gone a lot further.

 

What was so good about Nova? How would you make such a case for him? What particular ring attributes did he have such that we should hold him in high regard?

He lost to Galento because he was never nearly as good as some people apparently thought. He was exposed as a limited fighter with limited skill and ring iq.

 

He was very successful against the other contenders of his era.

There is some justification in what you are saying, but a man who is beating guys like Baer and Farr, still has no business losing to somebody like Galento!

 

Rahman could not fight. Strong puncher yes but muscle bound/slow as molasses. He does not belong in anyone’s top 50 anything.

Nova was very highly regarded in his time. His stock fell quite a bit after his non performance vs Louis but he was fighting Joe Louis.

Galento, and this point has been lost to time, was a highly feared fighter in his day. Huge KO puncher. I’ve heard stories that even as an old man his hook would bend a heavy bag in half.

 

I doubt if he could have done that even in his prime. Suprised at you Houdini that you would believe such imaginary tales.

 

It was a first hand account. There is absolutely no doubt Galento was a huge puncher.

 

What if I pick Galento?

 

Surprised this thread didn’t do better numbers.

 

Oh no

 

Better all around fighter , Joe Bugber or Vitali Klitschko ?

 

I'll come down on the side of Tua. He could actually box if he had to.