Max Baer vs David Tua

Tell me about it. David Tua is the most overrated fighter EVER.

 

I don't know how to be more concrete than to highlight tendencies in the fighters. These are plentifully exhibited on film.

Again, you want to compare resumes as tho they fought in equal eras and that is just laughably absurd. How do you suppose Jim Braddock would have fared in the 90' s? He beat a prime Baer. I doubt even the hardest core fan in the 90' S would know his name as a heavyweight.
I don't mean to upset this rosy tinged fantasy you have about yesteryear's athletes so carry on. Next you can tell me about how Galento is an exact facsimile of Tua.

 

OK let's look at the facts:

Baer won the lineal title, and beat a whole string of ranked contenders.

Tua never convincingly beat anybody ranked in the top ten!

Baer was a slugger.

Tua was a short armed swarmer.

I guess that Tua's era being fundamentally superior, is the only play left to you!

 

Pointing out Baer's specific flaws and limitations, and explaining why they might be especially grave liabilities against Tua, seems a great deal more "concrete" than your recitation of the paper-scissors-rocks, sluggers-swarmers-boxers rules.

 

There are plenty of counter-examples.

Frazier was also: (a) less durable than Tua; (b) more hittable/less defensively responsible than Tua; (c) didn't hit quite as hard as Tua (imo); and d) past his prime and physically damaged when he fought Foreman.

 

"Lineal" as tho that is some magical word... especially in an era of racial bias and mob control. Save your fairy tale incantations on someone with more naive ears.

List me those great contenders that Baer beat... wonderkinds the likes of Heeney and De Kuh and the awe-inspiring Tuffy Griffiths. He couldn't even get past the hapless Risko. How do any of those fellows do in the 1990's? Do we even know their names? And the fact that was able to get as far as he did on athletic ability highlights the paucity of talent available in that day.

Your short armed swarmer versus slugger passion play doesn't equate either. Tua wasn't as much a swarmer as a position player and opportunist, a guy who at his best was trying to position himself to sting and finish his opponent... in that sense kinda a like a guy who blasted out a scared Baer in 4.

Carry on...

 

Great point. Can't believe I didn't catch that.

 

OK, let's assume that Tua's era was vastly superior (a massive assumption in its own right).

Tua beat nobody!

He built his reputation entirely on opponents who were not ranked in the top ten!

Even if you made the strongest possible assumption for the superiority of his era, there would still be a big leap of faith here!

What exactly is your argument here?

 

You are fortunate that my PC is a wreck tonight, and I have to compose replies via phone/predictive text.

I will shred you as soon as I can compose an effective reply!

 

I shall treasure this quiescence while simultaneously waiting with bated breath for your response!

Sleepless I shall be. Sleepless, I say!

 

Look. Baer's isn't crap on a shingle. The dude was immensely talented. That talent along with a stout fighting heart served him well wading thru the breadline champs and local honkeys put in front of him. Hey, he won the White Heavyweight Championship of the World and they can't take that away from him. So, he had many a hiccup even along the route (Kennedy, Schaff, Loughran, et. al); his game wasn't very evolved.

He gets kudos for the kraut.

 

This might be a rough patch in our normally beautiful friendship!

 

The sleight of hand by which you erase Tua's devastating first-round obliterations of future champ Ruiz and former champ Moorer is really something else (and Rahman and Maskaev are hardly nobodies either).