Joe Bugner vs Duane Bobick in 1977 , 12 rds

Joe would have started fast, and tried to blow the notoriously slow starting American out immediately as he did Dunn, and as Tate and Norton did Duane. If Bobick manages to survive the first three rounds without being clobbered as he was by Knoetze (which Bugner also did to Denis), then I see Joe's hand speed, mobility, conditioning and skill dominating this one at range. A later stoppage on cuts could cost Duane. Bugner too established over the championship distance at this time to be worn down by Duane's attrition tactics, and simply too experienced.

 

It would have been withering performance by Frazier over a stunned, overwhelmed Bobick.

 

Bugner on points. Simply too good for Bobick.

 

If you admit that Holmes was never a big puncher, then how does Bobick's win tell us anything about Holmes's chin?

I'm not convinced and even if he was, Bugner would certainly land more combinations on Bobick.

I don't take seriously the possibility of Bobick stopping Bugner or indeed lasting the distance with a top 10 opponent during that era. Bugner was not a big puncher, but Bobick didn't have a worthy chin; as I said, Bugner showed he could KO chinny boxers like Dunn and Bobick.

 

Bobick was probably a harder puncher than Bugner, but that doesn't particularly matter in this match given Bugner's jaw.

An era in which Bobick didn't attain the same kind of success that Bugner did.

If he was, it wasn't on the basis of any impressive wins as a pro.

Yep and in the sense that both had fragile mandibles, it's a fair comparison. Bugner would have taken the fight to Bobick early on, just like against Dunn, and everything in Bobick's career tells us he couldn't handle that. Ergo, charitably assuming that Bobick's chin was 10 times better than that of Dunn's, Bugner finishes him at about round 10. More realistically, the slow-starting Bobick gets iced earlier than that.

 

Bobick was of similar standard to a lot of Bugner's European opposition.

 

In a nutshell.:good

 

I think it's a no brainer: Bugner had too much seasoning, toughness, and skill to lose to Bobick.

A better fight for Bobick -- and a more intriguing match -- would have been against '70s fringe contender Henry Clark. Like Bugner, Clark was a pretty good boxer/jabber who lacked genuine KO power. And, like Bugner, Clark had a granite chin.

Clark was smaller than Bugner, and a notch inferior in ability, too. For these reasons, I could see Bobick vs Clark being much more competitive than Bugner vs Bobick.

Bobick vs Clark -- each guy fighting on his best night -- is a pick 'em match. It would probably go the distance, and I think either guy could win.

 

You are woefully incorrect that relatively advanced age reduced the power of Frazier, Lyle, and Liston and Williams (both of whom Bugner sparred with). All of these fighters could still bang when they fought Bugner.

Remember: a heavyweight's power is the last thing that fades during the aging process. Although the legs and reflexes diminish, power tends to stay with heavyweights at least until their late 30s.

Other bangers that that tested Bugner's chin, arguably are Mac Foster and Henry Cooper.

It's beyond question that Bugner had superb durability. That was his calling card as a boxer.

 

Bobick was another who was brought along in a rather stupid fashion. After having thirty odd fights against second raters,he was thrown in with a lion like Ken Norton !! Why was n't he brought along in a slower,yet steady,progression ?

 

It's possible that Bobick's handlers lost faith in him, and threw him to the wolves just for the money, to recoup their investment (i.e., went for the one big payday against Norton to compensate for the years of money spent moving Bobick's career). That's what happens in pro boxing when supposedly up-and-coming prospects don't live up to expectations.

What intrigues me, though, is the possibility that Bobick might have been able to get an Ali fight in early 1977. I remember reading that Madison Square Garden was considering Ali vs. Bobick, or Norton vs. Bobick, at that time. What ever happened to the Ali-Bobick idea?

By 1977, Ali had faded considerably, and had lost much of the edge he had in '74, '75, and '76. That was obvious in the Evangelista and Spinks fights. So, I think Bobick might have looked good against Ali in 1977. Ali would have won, certqainly, but Bobick probably could have lasted 15 rounds, and enhanced his rep through a solid losing effort against the aging champ.

By contrast, Norton was ALL wrong for Bobick.