Who would have won between George Foreman or Frank bruno during the 90`s?

Except Bruno actually winning the WBC strap by beating McCall.

And as pointed out, Ruddock was gone at that point, virtually retired at that point, with only a pointless comeback in his future and no victims of note.

 

Foreman would never take the fight, ever, too much risk.........he hand picked every opponent in his comeback , except Holyfield none had a pulse and all were chinny.

Let that sink in for a minute.......he could not stop glass chinned Stewart/Saverese/Morrison/Schultz but he is going do a number on Bruno ? Laughable, Bruno is easily several notches better than the above.

Foreman was such a killer in his comeback that after he landed a lucky punch against another glass chinned Light Heavy he rather got stripped of his belts than facing anybody worth a lick........and even the hand picked Kraut back fired on him.

 

How many times was Bruno knocked down?

 

Against Foreman, Tommy flurried and ran. He made a show of winning the exchanges and got the h*ll out of Dodge. He had to thank his stars that he was fighting a fat, old man who couldn't catch him. He was literally running, gasping for breath with his back turned from Foreman. One must ask, if that was Tommy's true winning strategy why didn't he try it against other opponents?

Hint: Perhaps because they were a bit more spry.

 

Can you please take a break from being the Village Idiot for , lets say, a week ?

Thanks in advance

Yours truly

Sauhund II

 

Nah, Bruno's not several notches above them.
Bruno has a better chin that Morrison.

Bruno had great management and a great following in the UK and they carved him out a career. He really wasn't much good though.

 

What about Bruno flooring and KO'ing Ruddock?

 

Mark it's pretty obvious you don't rate Bruno at all which is fair enough. However you've got him down as some sort of quivering wreck in there who's frightened of his own shadow.