How Do The Careers Of Frank Bruno & Anthony Joshua Compare As Of Now?

Bruno defended once and got KOd by Mike Tyson

 

Agree but Bruno was no giant slayer either or mentally strong either

Head to head I pick Joshua

Bruno had tougher competition no doubt

 

I'll take you up on this. I love Bonecrusher but anyone who could box a bit beats him. I mean, lets not forget that this guy lost to Marvis Frazier and Adilson Rodriguez. He was a late-comer to boxing, and just did not have those super solid fundamentals.

As for Tim, one of my favs, but completely hot had cold due to drugs, nutrition and motivation. I would see Tim winning, but is would have to be one of his better nights, as even when he was not strung out, he often fought at a turgid pace.

I mean, either COULD win, but Joshua has to be the favorite.

 

Witherspoon gives Joshua a hiding.

 

For Bruno to be number 1, he would have had to be an ATG. Competition was hot back then.

 

Joshua is better.

Joshua's wins over old Wlad, Parker, Ruiz and old but dangerous Povetkin are significantly better than Bruno's wins over old Coetzee, old Bugner and McCall. In fact, i will take old Wlad to beat all of Bruno's opponents.

People are talking competition. Well Bruno missed fighting a lot of competition. He never fought Bowe, Holyfield, Mercer, Ruddock, Morrison, old Foreman, Moorer etc. His two losses to ATG Tyson and one to Lewis and perhaps even one to Witherspoon are understandable. But what about the rest? He missed out on fighting so many top guys.

Joshua has fought every notablen heavy of his era barring Wilder and Fury. And its not because he dodged them. Its the other way around.

If Bruno's two losses to a force in Tyson are justified, Joshua's two losses to a classy master boxer in Usyk are equally understandable.

On the other hand, Joshua avenged the Ruiz loss while Bruno never avenged the Smith loss.

People are really being too harsh on Joshua and are looking at Bruno through rose coloured glasses.

Joshua is an all time top 40 heavyweight. Bruno ain't top 50.

 

Coetzee was actually 30 years old when Bruno beat him.

Joshua did not fight every notable heavy of his era. Even leaving Fury and Wilder aside. He hasn't fought Zhang, Hrgovic, Joyce, Hunter, Ortiz, Miller.
If Morrison and Mercer are notables in Bruno's time, the ones I just mentioned are notables in AJ's era.

 

Neither of them would make an "all time list", whether it top 20, top 40, top 60.
Decent punchers but hype jobs really.

 

Ok. Fair. My point still stands: Joshua's wins are considerably better than Bruno's.

Coetzee was only 30 but he never had any notable wins afterwards. Whereas Povetkin went on to beat Whyte after losing to Joshua.

Joshua has fought more top guys than Bruno. He has fought Wlad, Povetkin, Ruiz x 2, Usyk x 2, Dubois, Whyte, Parker, even Wallin is decent.

Bruno missed out on practically every notable heavyweight between 90-95. These should have been his peak years.

Mercer is more notable than the guys you mentioned. Mercer gave virtually everyone including bona fide ATG's like Lewis and Holyfield a run for their money. Hrgovic, meanwhile, only has 1 big win on his resume and not much else. Hunter has one big win at heavyweight and nothing else. I wouldn't compare Mercer to Hrgovic, Hunter, Ortiz, Miller etc - Ray is better than those guys. Morrison? Yeah fair but not Mercer.

My overall point stands: wins over old Wlad, Parker, old Povetkin, Whyte, Ruiz, etc. are better wins than Bruno's. Joshua fought top fighters more often than Bruno did. It ain't close between them.

 

Joshua clearly achieved more as Bruno never successfully defended the belt when he was champion while Joshua had a decent reign on top and was seen as the number 1 guy by the majority for a few years, which Bruno never was.

Bruno did fight in a tougher era that's for sure, Tyson had the belts in the 80's and the 90's was just stacked. I doubt Joshua would have done much better in the 90's. He might of defended the belt a couple of times or more but he wouldn't be champion for very long, simply too many good fighters and with AJ's tendency to be complacent at times he'd get upset even if he played it safe.

But I do think Joshua is the slightly better fighter, but the gap in ability isn't as big as I once thought. It's easy to underestimate Joshua right now after the recent shocking loss but remember at his best he did beat a still good, albeit faded Wlad, Parker, Povetkin etc. I'm not sure Bruno beats them.

 

Hard to believe Bruno would lose to Ruiz Jr. But it's hard to believe any top HW for decades would lose to him.

 

Think AJ had higher highs and lower lows, h2h ... Actually really tough to call

If I had to pick one.... Bruno late stoppage

 

I think both h2h wise and career wise theres very little in it tbh. All of the wins Bruno got AJ probably would have gotten too and vice versa, they both have losses to guys they probably shouldnt have (Ruiz and Bonecrusher) and neither of them is beating Lennox or Usyk.

 

You have to take into account though that Bruno was green when he fought Bonecrusher hence it would a version of Joshua before he won a world title facing Bonecrusher.

Witherspoon is pretty durable and has a mean overhand right all it takes is one big overhand right and Joshua is in big trouble. Witherspoon has a good defence, good durablity, good skills, a game changing overhand right. I can’t see Joshua beating Witherspoon over the distance especially in a 15 round fight which Bruno vs Witherspoon was.