Would Bruno Lose To Toney??

You keep using the word assumption as though it were your new silver bullet, when it is really a pepper ball.

Interpretation of facts, while often requiring one or more assumptions, even if only implied, is not in itself assumption.


Maskaev has losses on his record to McCall, Tua, Johnson, Whitaker, Corey Sanders, Peter and Aguilera. This is a fact.

All but one of these losses were against men who were not rated, at the time (and a few that never were or would be). These are more facts.

Maskaev registered, not one, but two wins against Rahman. Another fact.


Here are some more facts:

Bruno has losses on his record against Smith, Witherspoon, Tyson and Lewis.

Bruno was never blown out inside a round.

Bruno was one of only 12 of Tyson's 50 victims who made it past the 4th round.

Bruno beat McCall to win the World Title.

Other than his victory against McCall, Bruno has one other win against a Ring-Rated opponent on his ledger.

The McCall whom Bruno had just beaten trounced Maskaev in his very next fight, inside a round.


Rahman has losses against Tua (as well as a Draw), Maskaev (x2), Lewis, Holyfield, Ruiz and Wlad.

In addition to his victory against Lewis, Rahman has one other win against a Ring-Rated opponent on his ledger.


Interpretation:

I think it reasonable to determine that Bruno did not lose to an opponent in as low a class as those that Maskaev lost to.

I think it reasonable to assess that, with all things being equal, Smith, Witherspoon, Tyson and Lewis could have dealt with Maskaev as emphatically as McCall and, if not as emphatically, then at least beat Maskaev with relative ease.

I think it reasonable to assess that Smith, Witherspoon and Tyson could have dealt with Rahman, more emphatically than they did Bruno.

I also think it is reasonable to suggest that Lewis did deal with Rahman in their rematch more emphatically than he did Bruno.

I think it is reasonable to assess Rahman's upset win against Lewis as a one-off event; an anomaly and not reflective of a level of competition he could realistically live with consistently, i.e. that he was not in Lewis' or Hoyfield's class.

I think it reasonable to assess that the previous point becomes more realistic when we consider that he lost to Maskaev twice and could not turn the trick, on two occasions, against Tua. That these results, combined with his loss to Ruiz, brings into question his ability to turn a result into a Win.

Whereas, I think, in McCall, a level below the elite fighters he had challenged for the title, Bruno was superior and would likely repeat that result, with the chances of this increasing the more we consider a Bruno in his prime.

I think it reasonable to assess Bruno's jab as being an effective tool against Rahman and that Frank would have the edge in power. I think these assets also play into a style advantage, as well as a size advantage, for Bruno's ability to suppress Toney.

I think it reasonable to suggest that Rahman would not have the sophistication or pace to confuse or disrupt Frank from a basic seek and destroy mission; that Rahman would be entrenched in a jabbing war and not be able to invent anything outside of this mode.

I think it reasonable to suggest that while Toney could survive with his defensive upper-body movement, his opportunities on the counter would be extremely limited.

Therefore, all things considered, based on the facts I have, up to now, and with what I have watched on film, I think it fair to assess that Frank would beat Maskaev, Rahman and Toney.

 

In all fariness, Bruno was in the same class as the likes of Ruiz and Rahman.It is also reasonable to suggest that an in shape Toney (Holyfield version) wins a decision against Bruno. Wlh knows.

It is.a pitty we never saw the best version of Toney at heavweight, there were reports he looked at his best before the Mc Cline fight where he got injured

 

As demonstrated in my previous post, forgiveness has nothing to do with it. I just do more than simply look at a ledger and think one is better than the other, "Therefore... ... ..."

Moreover, I don't think you assess ledgers particularly well. A case in point is you excusing Rahman's losses to Maskaev (and, at the same time plugging a gaping hole in Rahman's ledger) by simply suggesting that Bruno wasn't in Maskaev's class, which is utterly laughable.

That is the extent of your counter argument.

But, not to worry, I am forgiving of some things.


ps - Cooney was being matched against Carnera in the thread you are referring to, which I do not see as a particularly difficult pick. It is only your enthusiasm for Carnera and my entertaining such enthusiasm that drags such discussions on.

 

Anything is possible, but Toney at Heavyweight was always going to have physical disadvantages, which were not always going to be solved by slick boxing moves.

Ironically, as much as Rahman was able to use his jab to look good against Toney, he was only too keen to help James show off his defensive skills with a high-volume, low strike-rate output. He was as often just as keen to make it a close-range affair, too. This played right into Toney's hands.

Tactically, the worst thing Rahman could have done, in my opinion - and Toney knew how to get the most out of it.

Bruno was more cautious, very-much Jab-centric. Everything came off the jab. He wouldn't throw as much. He would pick his shots and, while Toney could be evasive, he was going to catch one eventually and Bruno's jab was like having a scaffold pole poked in your face - never mind the right that would often come after it.

Any Toney fight was intriguing, though - rarely a dull moment.

 

Toney was too slick and had way better movement all around. On top of that Toney would have had a legit defensive game plan as usual. After all you cant knockout someone you cant hit therefore Bruno's power is useless.
I see Toney dragging Bruno into the late rounds exposing his stamina and endurance.

 

But then again, Toney was grossly overweight against Rahman. In the rematch, where Toney was in better shape, Rahman quit.

 

All of this is known to me.

For whatever it is worth, I am not arguing that Maskaev was any great shakes.

However I tend to have a higher opinion of a fighter who posted multiple wins over contenders, even if they come at the cost of losses.

So who were the live contenders that Bruno fought?

Essentially Smith, Witherspoon, Tyson, Lewis and McCall.

He is 1-5 against this group of fighters.

Hardly the basis for thinking that he is some head to head monster.

For whatever it is worse I don't hold the first Tua fight against Rahman, and I think that he deserved the decision in the second.

His win over Lewis is obviously far better than anything Bruno accomplished.

Forgive me numbering your points.

1. No objection.
2. No objection.
3. I think it very likely that Rahman could have beaten Smith or Witherspoon.
4. I think the fact that Rahman managed to split a series with Lewis is the salient point.
5. I disagree. Rahman could catch lighting in a bottle some days, and stink the place out on others.
6. Rahman should in reality have two wins over Tua, one by DQ, and one by decision.
7. There I disagree. I think Bruno might well have been lucky to get McCall when he did.
8. I think that we have to look at what these assets were able to deliver in his real world fights, and that this should give us pause for thought.
9. I am far from confident that things woudl unfold this way.
10. I might just see my way to installing Bruno as favorite over Toney, but not with any confidence.
11. Maskaev I will give you. Rahman I will not. Toney I will stretch a point, but not with any confidence.

 

I usually go with the boxers over the punchers in H2H matchups and I will here, too.

Toney is SO much better & more skilled than Bruno, that I think he wins this by UD. Just can't see Frank landing anything serious.

 

James Toney wins. Bruno can hurt Toney early but wont stop him.

Toney takes over down the stretch and Brunos lack of conditioning would be a problem

 

My assessment of these men would be thus.

Bruno never fought a top contender unless there was a belt on the line, or at the very least an imminent title shot, and when he did he almost invariably lost.

Rahman took a lot more risks, and his resume has the scars to prove it, but this enabled him to accrue more good wins, adn indeed become a two time champion.

If you matched Bruno the way that Rahman was matched, I woudl expect him to have more losses, and possibly looses to worse men than those he lost to.

The final comes down to what each man proved he was capable of, and Rahman proved himself to be capable of much more impressive feats.

This is why I consider Rahman to be the greater force head to head, albeit he is not the sort of man that inspires confidence.

 

A focused Bruno that lost to a pretty much prime Lewis, beats Toney.

I can't see it any other way.

 

Which contenders did Maskaev beat?

I've not made a case for Bruno being a "head to head monster."

From a Head-to-Head perspective, I simply don't rate Maskaev, Rahman and Ruiz (and Toney at Heavyweight), as highly as you do.

Tua, Rahman, Ruiz, are all much of a muchness.

Maskaev shouldn't really be included in the same discussion with them, but is - only on account of him having beaten Rahman twice.

And, if the question were, who between Bruno and Rahman has the best win on their respective ledgers, this would be relevant.

In determining head-to-head prowess, a superficial point is not more salient than placing this "pair" into context.

So, this is at the peak of McCall's career - him being the defending titlist, having just come off wins against Lewis and Holmes, and Bruno is catching him at the right time?

I don't think so.

Maskaev certainly didn't catch him at the right time, in McCall's very next fight.

I have - and it doesn't give me pause, when all facts, observations and assessments are considered.

If you think Rahman was in Lewis' and Holyfield's class, then I really don't know what else to say to you.

 

I'm from Southern California and will always be a huge Frank Bruno supporter. The dude was sculpted, had big power and would have fools looking for that soft spot on the canvas!!

 

Without taking sides or injecting myself into the debate there's not a chance in the world Smith was a contender at the time. Bruno himself at 21-0 all stoppages was barely in the 10 let alone Smith at 13-1 with no significant win to speak of.

 

Rahman at the risk of using circular logic.

OK then I will take the phrase back.

Clearly you think that Bruno's career woudl have been very different if he had fought in the 00s.

The problem is that Bruno has only one or arguably two good win's on his leger.

That is difficult to overlook.

McCall clearly wasn't at the peak of his career when he rematched Lewis, and his problems clearly started well before that.

That was never in any way implied, but if Rahman is as bad as you say, then that would be a pretty damning indictment on Lewis.