So, Tua blasting 4 champs, ex and future, is not as impressive as Marciani blasted a mummy in Louis. Ok.
No it isn't quite frankly. Louis was a relevant contender when Marciano beat him, and the guy's that Tua beat were not.
I repeat: "So let's not beat round the bush then: By your boxrec/Ring rankings-based logic, Tua almost certainly loses to ****ell, right? So would you actually stay faithful to the logic of your argument and follow it to its logical conclusion, and pick ****ell to beat Tua?"
No I wouldn't. I am not sure that Cockell would have a very strong case, even based upon your straw man of my argument.
Sorry, I didn't mean to strawman you. I had interpreted the bold text as suggesting that Tua would inevitably lose to a guy like Cockell, assuming Cockell was at the top of his game. Now if you're admitting that the Cockells and Valdezes of Tua's era were tougher opponents than Cockell and Valdez would have been, then I stand down and I commend you for acknowledging the differences between the two eras!
What I am trying to get across, is not that Tua was better or worse than Cockell or Valdez, or that he would beat or lose to them. I am suggesting that you should have grave reservations, about picking him over the very beat of that era, let alone predicting that he could dominate the era. I wouldn't ask for a lot more than that.
He beats old Luis has a tough fight a Layne but wins. Loses to Walcott and Charles and if he fought Archie he’d be embarrassed. He loses to the Rock by points in a 15 rounder. Just my opinion.