We know that JOINT PROMOTIONS decided which Wrestlers were to hold their
MOUNTEVANS TITLE BELTS-and that certain Wrestlers were 'Favoured' over others-
Good Example being JIMMY BREAKS- a Multiple Champion!!
It seems that ROYAL and FAULKNER were to have Titles-although if you follow ANGLO'S
Sentiments-'they didn't NEED them'!-So an established pattern was laid down which each
BELT Holder usually having a fairly longish Tenure!
But then we get the very strange Scenario of JACKIE PALLO 'Arrogantly trotting off' with
the HEAVY-MIDDLEWEIGHT TITLE-which he held for about A MONTH after 21/4/1969
before 'Losing' it back to ROYAL-and then from 29/8/1975- STEVE LOGAN 'Winning'
the STRAP for LESS than 3 Months before similarly 'Returning' it to ROYAL!!
Why bother with either?? Was it to show the Punters that ANY Wrestler could 'Win' the
Title? Was it a sop to the Feelings of PALLO and LOGAN for being 'excluded' from the
'Club' Who knows the Answers? Has Anyone seen Photos of PALLO/LOGAN WEARING
the BELT??
MAIN MASK
Alternatively could it have been done as recognition of the service these gents had given the company over the years.
Here's a thought: Bert was also ageing. To drop his belt, he had to be sure of getting it back from an old buddy. Risking it against some up-and-coming high-flyer or, worse, someone with form like Peter Preston, well, that wasn't on.
It looked good to the fans that his reign was occasionally interrupted. And it gave much needed credence to the "skills" of Logan and Pallo.
It's a good question Main Mask and with both now gone we'll never know the answer. We do know promoters chose the champions and neither would hold the title unless they wanted it. But why? Pallo and Logan had been earning them loads of dosh without titles and the belts seemed to offer nothing to anyone.
Maybe by the late 1960s the promoters were beginning to suspect that us punters were beginning to smell a rat in that the big names were not champions and so threw us a tit bit to keep us quiet.
Yep, a fascinating ongoing mystery, with both their brief reigns remarkably similar.
Bert Royal could tell us all the answers.
The only plausible reason I can think of is that each wanted this title reign, to tell their friends and family or for whatever reason. But then so many other wrestlers would have wanted that.
Logan's reign was a bit silly as it came when he was very immobile.
Perhaps a similarity is Billy Joyce generously sharing his title around in the mid-sixties?