Frank Bruno Beats Layne,Lastarza,Mathews,C*ckell

These men were not the best of the 50s. That's my point. So you can call these men weak, but you can't call the era weak.


And your wrong btw. Mathews was top 10 when he fought Marciano. He got moved up after his win over Layne.

 

Why are we grouping these guys together as if they are somehow comparable?

I would say that Layne was a level above LaStarza and ****ell, and that they in turn were a level above Matthews.

 

I think Frank Bruno beats most or even perhaps all those guys. Looking at the men who bested Frank they all had one thing in common. They were all generally big punchers with world class power, usually greater than average size and in their primes. It took a big, powerful and aggressive man to impose himself on Frank Bruno and even they took plenty of big shots in the process.

 

He probably gets mixed results.

People tend to forget this these days, but Bruno generally lost when he stepped up in competition.

He was not very highly regarded while he was active, but since then the idea has crystallized with many, that he was some sort of wrecking machine.

 

He did. But you also have to look at the description of the men who he stepped and lost to and that of the ones he's being asked to fight here.

 

"Layne was too easy to hit and never in shape,he would be worn down."

If Layne wasn't in shape he would have never been able to take that beating from punishment from satterfield and come back to win the fight. If he wasn't in shape he would have never put on that terrific work rate and tremendous performance on film to outpoint a prime jersey joe Walcott, who was a much better fighter than Bruno.

Not being vascular doesn't mean you weren't in shape, Dempsey in his prime lost twice to fat willie Meehan. Firpo looked fat and out of shape. Same with Willard.

Besides Having an iron chin and good stamina in his prime, he also had a quick heavy right and a good left jab. If Layne makes it to later rounds he could wear down Bruno and tire him out. Not likely but I would give him a punchers chance

Bruno was a rock solid 245lb and could punch, so I favor him heavily over Layne, but I couldn't count out Layne. Layne in his short prime was dangerous if you had poor stamina, which Bruno does. Bruno was actually too stiff and muscle blind.

 

I wouldn't favor Bruno over a 1952 Walcott no way

 

McCvey

Do you think Bruno would have gone undefeated against Dempsey and marcianos competition?

 

"Lastarza had nothing to keep Bruno off with Bruno out jabbed Lewis for significant periods of their fight he would bust Lastarza's face to bits, you mentioned the term "well managed" Lastarza is the poster boy for that description."

Yes lastarza and Jack Dempsey are the poster boys. Lastarza avoided the dangerous black heavyweights of the era like Dempsey did.

 

He might have been unlucky to share an era with Tyson and Lewis, but I don't think he was unlucky to share an era with those versions of Smith and Witherspoon.

This is a guy who is going to get mixed results in any era.