[GIF] Baer v. Galento

I would love to have seen Galento vs Marciano, or Galento vs Bonavena.

 

That's one of the points we've been trying to make. These guys come on here saying that the old timers had primitive technique and they use Galento and Baer as their examples. Two of the roughest didn't give a **** fighters there ever was. They didn't give a **** about technique they would just as soon fought a bar room brawl as they would fight in the ring. Their main objective was to knock the guy out and could care less about the decision. If a million right hands to the face mean't they would get to land there 1 ko punch then so be it. They did what had to be done. I think where those of us defending them get carried away is trying to explain the things they did that brought them to the top like Galento fighting out of a low crouch. It's those little things that are unspoken but everybody knows. These wise asses are just trying to ruffle feathers.

 

When both of them came up against a fine technical boxer who had the fundamentals ,allied with terrific power we saw them absolutely outclassed. Galento because he did not have the speed of foot , defence or head movement to exploit the power he undoubtedly possessed.
Baer because he had no answer to the jabs that smoothly turned into hooks on route , and unerringly found their target and also because he had no clue how to avoid the right crosses that homed in on his chin.

 

They were outclassed. But don't you think Galento knocking Louis down is nothing to scoff at?

People here are saying that amatuers can beat Galento.

 

The statement is not accurate .. you're picking two fighters w zero form .. they were considered just as wild back n 1940 .. look at Ray Robinson in 1940.

 

Chuck Wepner dropped Ali. An even match might be him against Galento.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Nobody said they were the greatest fighters fundamentally or whatsoever. What we are saying is that they were not unskilled bums. Schmeling was technically skilled and Baer ran right through him. Galento was never one for skills. That's his fault and his legacy reflects it. I wouldn't say Galento was completely outclassed. He did knock down one of the greatest heavyweights of all time with a great counter punch.

Fighting was what they did and they were obviously good or they wouldn't have reached that level. Whether they resembled bar room brawlers is irrelevent. It got the job done. 1 right hand or left hook from these fighters would end even the top heavyweights of the era's night.

 

No, I would have to say that Galento was better than Wepner.

 

I said, here or in the Baer thread , that he had undeniable power,that doesn't mean he had subtle skills,he was a very tough mother f*cker with a top chin and power. I like Baer and Galento ,but I think I'm realistic about their boxing abilities.

 

I haven't called them bums ,I don't use that term about professional fighters.
Baer didn't," run right through ,"Schmeling ,he was behind early on.
Possessing power does not make you a scientific boxer clever boxers seldom gave Baer the opening to land his overhand right.Loughran took 7 out of 10 rds against him just by circling, and jabbing him repeatedly .Like wise good boxers often rendered Galento's lumbering swings and slow feet ineffectual.

 

He certainly achieved more.

 

I should have added heavyweight there. But yes, Schmeling was special in terms of tehnical ability. Like a HW Mayweather.