Second best British Heavyweight

That is prety much the case.

Lou Nova beat Farr more convincingly than Louis had and then beat Max Baer (who was enjoying something of an indian summer at the time and expected to fight Louis for the title). Then people started to openly talk about himn as the guy who would likley dethrone Louis.

At this point he was heavily hyped and his fight against Tony Gallento was surposed to be a mere formality. Gallento of course har other ideas.

He rebounded from his loss to Gallento with a win over Pat Comiskey and another win over Max Baer, securing a title shot against Joe Louis. His trainer (Ray Arcel) said that he was dominating his sparring partners and impressing the press to the extent that the odds narrowed in the run up to the fight but that Louis intimidated him. After the loss to Louis he went into decline putting together a few decent wins but never again being a top force in the division.

I do think however that Nova was one of the best contenders of that period. Going into the Louis fight his only losses were a points loss to Maxie Rosenbloom in his second year as a profesional and the loss to Tony Gallento which was marred by use of foul tactics which would never have been alowed in a world title fight even in that period.

 

Yeah, I've read reports about the Nova-Galento fight. Basically the referee just let Galento get on with it, no-holds-barred dirty fighting.

 

That fat little freak might just have prevented another mega fight from happening in that era.

There had already been a head of steam building up for a Louis Baer II (possible megafight) when Lou Novan knocked Baer out of contention.

Now if the press had continued hyping Nova the way they did before he lost to Gallento then Louis Nova could plausibly have been built up into something lik Holmes Cooney.

 

Sounds a bit like Messrs Bugner and Farr then!

Bruno was a bully, if he felt confident he rarely lost. There is nothing for Bruno to be scared of fighting either.

He would have a massive power and weight advantage over both.

Farr would be harder, because he had the ability to up the intensity of a fight, Bugner is too one paced to have an affect on Bruno's other weakness, his stamina; Bruno could go 12 rounds with prime Bugner.

Farr had heart and could take a lick, but I think the fight would be similar to Bruno/McCall, with the Bomber miles ahead early, but hanging on for dear life at the end, to edge the decision.

But, like I said previously, Farr and possibly Joe, were better than Bruno and would place higher than him in a list of best British Heavyweights.

 

The fight was a bit of a let down, maybe because it was the first huge British fight we had not gone to since Bruno/Witherspoon.

But I think what let the fight down was that Bruno won, it ruined him.

Bruno should of always gone down as lovable loser, the man who always found a way to blow the big one.

I think I was in the only house in Britain that were screaming at McCall to knockout the Bomber in the final round!

It would of done Bruno more good (if he had lost), as the stress of the Tyson rematch, probably did not help his personal demons.

 

Bugner...