Joe Bugner Tribute Thread: All Time Great Contender

[frankenfrank]

This man stopped 3 men who went d distance with this man :


Incidentally , those 3 men were all of their mutual opponents and coincidentally , 1 of them Maskaev stopped twice which is also much better than what this man achieved against him :

[Senor Pepe']

Could have been a Joe Bugner opponent,

A safe 'white guy' who couldn't fight.

Mark Gastineau

[Stevie G]

Originally Posted by kenmore

Bugner by decision. It would be a bad fight, because Joe would play it safe, and take no chances exposing himself to Ingo's right. But Bugner's left jab would be the punch of the night.

I can't see the smallish Ingo penetrating Bugner's guard. At close quarters, Bugner would use his 30 lbs weight advantage to tie Ingo up. Joe's advantages in height, reach, and open ring boxing ability make the difference here.

Spot on in my reckoning,Kenmore.

[Stevie G]

Originally Posted by kenmore

Ellis was washed up by 1973; nobody denies this. Kirkman, Lyle, and Bugner beat ringworn version of Ellis.

Lyle scored a near-shut out decision over Ellis. Bugner won every round against Jimmy, flooring him in round ten for good effect.

Kirkman was knocked down by Ellis in their 1973 bout. After that, Kirkman basically outmuscled Ellis to get the nod. Neither guy was hurt in the fight. Afterwards, Ellis compared Kirkman to Bonavena, physically and stylistically.

Kirkman was a clubfighter on par with Scott LeDoux or Chuck Wepner. He was never rated higher than 9th or 10th worldwide, and even then only for brief periods.

Don't forget that Memphis Al Jones -- a fighter with a 6-21 record -- knocked Kirkman cold in just three rounds in 1974. If that doesn't tell you the truth about Kirkman, then nothing will.

Ellis started a downhill trajectory after Frazier beat him in 1970.

[Stevie G]

Originally Posted by kenmore

You know your stuff better than most of the guys who've contributed to this thread (most of whom I now have on ignore). We're you around in the '70s, and we're you following boxing then? As a Englishman, you must know a lot about Bugner.

I say it's too bad that Bugner retired in 1976, then again in 1977. The following periods of inactivity ruined him. He was only 26 or 27 years old at the time; he should have been entering his prime. He lost his best years, I think.

I think part of the problem in 1977 is that Mickey Duff just didn't want to promote Bugner anymore. I'm not certain, but I think that's part of the reason Bugner stopped fighting for five years after the Lyle bout.

I was indeed around in that Golden Age of heavies I was aged 18 - 22 during Bugner's prime years of 1973-77. I always had a soft spot for Joe,but he could be infuriating in the way that he never unleashed the best of himself on a consistent basis.

[Senor Pepe']

Joe Bugner,

Had a lot of fans in America, and many pulled for him in both his bouts
versus Muhammad Ali.

I believe, if he fought 'mad', instead of 'controlled', he would have made it
to the top.

[jowcol]

Originally Posted by Stevie G

I always had a soft spot for Joe,but he could be infuriating in the way that he never unleashed the best of himself on a consistent basis.

My feelings exactly and because of this, he had a checkered, inconsistent career.

How about a Bugner-Terrell dream scrap? I'd rather watch an apple core turn brown.

[kenmore]

Originally Posted by jowcol

My feelings exactly and because of this, he had a checkered, inconsistent career.

Between 1972 and 1977, Bugner went 18-4, with his only losses being to Ali, Frazier, and Lyle. Nobody expected him to win the Ali or Frazier fights. The wins included victories over several respectable top-15 names, such as Ellis, Foster, and Dunn. I'm not sure that qualifies as "inconsistent."

[kenmore]

Originally Posted by Stevie G

Ellis started a downhill trajectory after Frazier beat him in 1970.

Ellis did beat Chuvalo in 1971. He also won 11 out of 12 between the first Frazier loss and the end of 1972, his only defeat coming against Ali. That's not so bad.

I think Ellis's real decline started in 1973, when he was stopped by Shavers in one round. The split decision loss to Kirkman was a shocker. It was also surprising that Ellis was held to a draw by Larry Middleton. Hometown cooking may have been a factor working against Jimmy in both fights, though.

Ellis was dominated by Lyle and Bugner, which is no shame given that these guys were rated in the top 5 or 6 worldwide at the time. Finally Frazier TKO'd Ellis in 1975.

But even in spite of Ellis's post-1973 decline, all the boxing magazines still rated him well within the worldwide top-15 in late 1974. That speaks well of Bugner's win over Jimmy that year.

[kenmore]

I remember the Lyle fight, and I admit to being quite let down by the result. I was just a kid at the time, but before the fight, was convinced Bugner would win. The oddsmakers favored Bugner by 2 to 1 in the weeks leading up to the bout (the betting numbers slipped to 8-5 favoring Joe on fight day), which bolstered my confidence.

For nine rounds, the match was anyone's fight, with Bugner apparently have a slight edge. Two judges had him up on the cards at that point. Lots of mauling, pushing, occasional heavy punching on the inside. Bugner, in fact, broke Lyle's nose in the mid-rounds, and I think Ron had to go without a mouthpiece after that.

But Lyle swept the final three rounds cleanly. I'm not sure what happened: either Bugner was not as well conditioned as he could have been, or Lyle's power punches finally wore Joe down. Either way, Bugner suffered a broken rib and a punctured eardrum. The eardrum injury in particular could explain why Bugner shifted to the defense in the 10th, 11th, and 12th.

Final scores were a split decision for Lyle, which was fair. Lyle's win was narrow but clear.

One mystery about this fight is why didn't Bugner exhibit the fast, circling footwork he showed earlier in his career against Ali and Frazier. That's what it took to beat a brawny guy like Lyle. Did Lyle force Bugner off his feet? Or was Bugner not sufficiently prepared for the fight?

Throughout the bout, Bugner mauled, and failed to box, with his harder-hitting foe. I was expecting Bugner to command the fight from the distance, spearing Lyle with jabs, and running and clinching when necessary. Instead we got indecisive wrestling, which ultimately worked to the powerful Lyle's advantage.

This fight did a lot of damage to Bugner's reputation.

[jowcol]

Originally Posted by kenmore

Between 1972 and 1977, Bugner went 18-4, with his only losses being to Ali, Frazier, and Lyle. Nobody expected him to win the Ali or Frazier fights. The wins included victories over several respectable top-15 names, such as Ellis, Foster, and Dunn. I'm not sure that qualifies as "inconsistent."

Before I comment ken...I respect any boxing fan and you surely qualify as an old-time efficianado.
That being said:
Ellis? He had seen many better days and was on the downside of the rollercoaster (and wasn't someone, at his advanced career, that posed a big threat to anyone.)
Foster? Mac? He was a non-issue after the Quarry KO in 70.
Dunn? Dunn? come on ken, you're reaching here.
In closing, I loved Joe after the 1st Ali fight in 73'. I thought he had all the tools but...he didn't use them and IMHO is simply a footnote or asterisk in boxing's history of ''could of, should of's"
Did he not have EVERY opportunity between 73-76 to step up and establish himself?
His career shows ZERO wins against ANY top contender.

[Senor Pepe']

November 1973

Joe Bugner (W Dec 10) over Mac Foster 30-3-0 (30 KO's)

Looks good on paper, but as 'jowcol' states, it was 'non-issue' win.

Mac, at 31 years-old and 233 lbs. (22 lbs. heavier than when he fought Muhammad Ali
in April 1972), was ridiculed for his 'non-effort' versus Bob Stallings only 5-months earlier.

If humanly possible, Mac put in an even less athletic effort versus Joe Bugner.

To put it bluntly, Mac was there for nothing more than a 'pay-day' and a large
helping of Steak and Kidney Pie, Yorkshire Pudding and Pound Cake.

[kenmore]

Originally Posted by jowcol

Before I comment ken...I respect any boxing fan and you surely qualify as an old-time efficianado.
That being said:
Ellis? He had seen many better days and was on the downside of the rollercoaster (and wasn't someone, at his advanced career, that posed a big threat to anyone.)
Foster? Mac? He was a non-issue after the Quarry KO in 70.
Dunn? Dunn? come on ken, you're reaching here.
In closing, I loved Joe after the 1st Ali fight in 73'. I thought he had all the tools but...he didn't use them and IMHO is simply a footnote or asterisk in boxing's history of ''could of, should of's"
Did he not have EVERY opportunity between 73-76 to step up and establish himself?
His career shows ZERO wins against ANY top contender.

I've already explained to you why a guy's win column -- and his lack of wins over a top contender -- don't tell the full story about his abilities. I can't understand why the point eludes you.

And my point about Ellis, Foster and Dunn is that they were solid top-15 talents. Not many contenders even beat many top-15 talents. Lots of guys in the top ten get there by beating one or two top-20 opponents, and nobody else.

Do you really believe that Cooper's disputed win over the 198 lbs Zora Folley is more of an accomplishment that Bugner's losing efforts against Ali and Frazier in 1973?

You need to lay off the record books and pay more attention to what happens inside the ring.

[kenmore]

Originally Posted by jowcol

Did he not have EVERY opportunity between 73-76 to step up and establish himself?
.

Bugner remained ranked in the worldwide top-10 consistently between 1971 and 1977. That doesn't qualify as "established" for you?

[Senor Pepe']

No Harm,,,,,

But I would take Gregorio Peralta over Joe Bugner.

The Argentinian, clearly had a 'bigger heart'.