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

Is your position essentially that Tony Galento was a better all-around fighter than David Tua because he beat Lou Nova?

 

My position is that Galento has a better resume because he beat Lou Nova.

Whether that makes him a better all round fighter, is obviously open to interpretation.

 

Tua was exactly as skilled as he should have been in order to maximize his assets and minimize his shortcomings. He had a good punch arsenal, knew his way to his range and target, had good balance, and he was only dropped once when he was 55 fights and 38 years into it, long after a guy with his style should have retired. It takes a lot of skill to do what he did. What he lacked was a dedication and a thirst for the game.

 

Nope!

 

And those are possibly the most important attributes in a swarmer.

 

Yep.

You can't do much more than beat the #1 contender, without actually becoming the champion.

Nova was not even a weak #1 contender either.

He was seen as something of a standout going into the Galento fight, and he won the #1 ranking back.

I appreciate that we have some rather odd outcomes on both sides here, but there it is!

 

What did Galento do as well as or better than Tua?

 

He was better at being born in 1910 and thereby competing in the Golden Era of cigar chomping, Fedora wearing gumshoes and dames who knew their place lest they get tuned up.

 

One thing, and one thing only.

I understand that this is a bit of a cheap shot.

Win fights!!!!

 

By your reasoning, Galento was much, much better at losing fights too, right?

 

Tua light years ahead of Galento. Galento has powerful legs - had he trained seriously and took the sport serious he may have had more of an impact. Outside of the flash kd of Louis, whom then got up and tortured him Galento’s only claim to fame is the foul fest vs Nova.
He beat up a washed up Nathan Mann who was decent.
Every top fighter he faced handled him easily, Louis, the Baer brothers, Earnie Schaaf. Etc.
Tua was always dangerous

 

Of course, but you seem to overvalue that ability.

A fighter's final standing, turns on how close to the summit they get.

See Jimmy Braddock!

 

There is a serious problem with this line of argument.

If you question Galento's win over Nova, then you must do the same for Tua's win over Rahman.

By doing that, you put Tua's sole win over a ranked opponent, on the negotiating table!

I would advise that you don't go there, if you are trying to make the case for Tua!

 

Tua was bigger, stronger, faster, much more skilled, harder hitting and would have flattened Galento in a round .. very few men that ever lived could out slug David Tua which makes the Ike Ibeabucci performance exceptional.

 

Sort of a sidebar but I most certainly do disagree with you here! I think that losing to a bunch of very unimpressive b- and c-fighters probably reveals more about a fighter’s quality than how they perform on a single night against an ordinary but highly-ranked contender, or an apparently unmotivated, disinterested champion. I believe that any number of guys could knock off Max Baer or Lou Nova if they catch them on the right night...