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

I disagree. The length of that peak matters a lot, and their consistency. Else guys like Bowe would rank way higher.

 

That's Janitor's logic.

 

So did Max Baer, yet he stopped Galento?

 

There really is no limit to the absurdities you quickly reach if you take Janitor’s approach to evaluating the sport of boxing seriously and follow it to its logical conclusions. Wins like Galento’s over Nova and Schmeling’s over Hamas become some of the most impressive and important non-title wins in the division’s history! A win over C*ckell at the pinnacle of his heavyweight career (lol) becomes more impressive than wins over slightly pre- or post-peak ATGs.

 

And it's kind of sad, isn't it? I mean, he's obviously an intelligent, knowledgeable man, who could be a tremendous asset to a forum like this - so why is he trolling us with this never-ending nonsense? I don't get it!

 

He seems to be wilfully playing devils advocate on many occasions.

 

I have enjoyed sharing this forum with him for the past 11 years? I think he is a storehouse of knowledge on eras I am not as familiar with. I believe he is one of our finest posters on this forum and has been an asset for years, who never speaks with insults or disparaging remarks to or about other posters.

 

Both would beat Nova like a drum, I also pick both to beat Galento and by stoppage!

 

I have to be frank with you here.

I value excellence at some point in a fighters career, over consistency against B and C grade opposition.

The contrary argument sounds very convincing, when the second fighter looks as impressive as Tua on film, but what if they don't ?

Wouldn't you go for the guy who has at least proved himself against the men at the top?

 

I am not prepared to add those fights to their resumes, without them even lacing up the gloves!

Many were equally confident that Nova would beat Galento, and I would have been, but he didn't!

 

I agree, but sometimes only one mans peak touches the clitoris!

Excuse the crudeness!

 

Just to be clear, are you talking about how we ought to measure a fighter's overall quality and ability or how we should rank their resumes? Or do you see these things as more or less one and the same?

 

Not the better all round fighter.

Arguably the more successful fighter.

Galento and Cockell were basically aberrations, who enjoyed a lot more success than they should have done, based on their natural ability!

Tua was an arch underachiever, who could and should, have done much more!

 

Note that the OP said head to head and resume.

I have the ingrained mindset that resume is history, and head to head is speculation.

If the op had said head to head, or skill set, I could have looked upon Tua more favorably.

If the only thing that I knew about him and fat Tony was their skill sets, then I would expect Tua to go much further.

 

I'm not asking you to,but let's try another tack ,Tua and Ibeabuchi versus Galento and Nova.Who are your picks?