Allyn Gibson wrote:
No because he is claiming it's the Second Doctor with a different face not a regeneration - I can't see it myself.
Yet that would be consistent with what "The War Games" tells us, and it would reflect the way the Doctor's changing face was seen into the early 1980s. Lawrence Miles and Tat Wood devote a sidebar to what exactly is a regeneration in About Time
3 (both editions) in a piece called "When Was Regeneration Invented?" Miles and Wood explain that viewing Hartnell-to-Troughton and Troughton-to-Pertwee as a regeneration like Tennant-to-Smith is a retrospective retcon; it makes sense to call those events "regeneration" in light of later stories, but the terms in which the stories themselves approached the matter aren't similar to the way regenerations are approached later. Hartnell to Troughton was a "rejuvenation" -- the TARDIS made the Doctor younger -- while Pertwee to Baker was a "regeneration" -- every cell in the Doctor's body changed. Troughton to Pertwee, however, is something entirely different than either rejuvenation or regeneration; it's more like extensive plastic surgery to make the Doctor look different. It's not until "The Invasion of Time" that the idea that regeneration is a natural thing Time Lords do takes root, because the series needed to explain why Borusa looked different, and then "Destiny of the Daleks" normalizes it. The idea that the Time Lords did their super surgery on Troughton to make him look like John Hurt and then, once his usefulness was at an end, perform the same surgery to make John Hurt look like Jon Pertwee, is a supportable idea based on "The War Games" and "Spearhead."
But the idea they are the same "individual" (whatever that actually means with timelords) is removed earlier than that - in the Third Doctors.