Loughran beat Carnera. Sorry if you didn't understand that. Yeah there's not much to say, don't bother. Not the footage itself. It's usually just your exaggerated opinion that goes along the footage that is "unfair".
The bottom line is, one of the men that we're discussing lost to a bunch of unranked, unimpressive and small men--sometimes by ko--and the other did not. And maybe Oma does much, much, much better fighting less frequently (and maybe some of his opponents do even better too), but who knows?
So Loughran beating Carnera is your counter to my contention that a plodding little man will have a hard time beating a faster opponent with substantial height, reach, and size advantages? Embarrassing.
You look at guys like Oma's record, and compare it to more modern fighters who reach the same level of boxing. And there is a huge disparity in the amount of losses. So you look at their losses to find abnormalities that can explain the phenomenon, and the main difference you see is the frequency of fights they have. And then, you'll notice that the obscure losses often happen when the frequency of bouts is abnormally high. Look at Galento. Remove from his record all the fights he had in the same week and same month, and all of a sudden it looks normal.
Take out all the losses from Galentos record where he had a fight within 2 months, and his record is 80-3. The only times he lost, when he had more than TWO months break between another bout, were against Louis, Max Baer, and Buddy Baer.
He did cagey things...except when he didn't...yeah..... Because Oma moved his head. Demonstrated skills against all time great fighters can only be a positive.
I didn't see faster. Loughran was faster than Carnera. Scott does not look faster than Oma. And Oma's punch output is way better. He's a far better puncher than Scott.
Yeah, I just noticed it recently. Once I noticed, I can't unsee it. Next time you're on the Boxrec page for an old legend who has an abnormal amount of losses, look how many journeymen losses occur within weeks or a month with other bouts. What happens when you run the experiment on Robinson record? He goes from 19 losses to 6. Think about the psychological affects of fighting twice a month, or twice a week. It desensitizes you to the importance of each bout.
Oma has a 30% ko rate 29 stoppages in 96 fights. From Dec 1939 until Dec 1941 Oma had18 fights and won just 5! From May1946 until May1948 Oma had 9 fights and won just 1! What was he doing right in those fights? Revisionist nonsense!
Scott looks faster to me. Just compare how the two of them move around the ring. Not sure how you know whatever it is you know about Oma's punch output but it probably would have dropped precipitously against someone like Scott. You often use "better puncher" in ways that I think are just conclusory labels. Neither here nor there in this case. Neither Scott nor Oma had particularly good power or were offensive juggernauts. Scott's jab is better than anything in Oma's arsenal, especially looking at them head to head.
All those stats and fights are meaningless: the bottom line is that he once made Ezzard Charles stumble.
Cmon. You don't think fighting at such a high frequency matters? Multiple professional bouts within weeks of each other, often?