Originally posted by QueensburyRules
View Post
Then again maybe not.
Maybe a 'fight of the century' should only be about boxing and the anticipation of the fight itself. Louis-Schmeling II was profoundly important but only half so because of the anticipation of the fight itself, the other half political. So maybe not.
It looks as though there are considerably more 'trials of the century' than there are fights.
Was there enough to make Louis-Conn II a disappointing "fight of the century" ?
Comment