Marciano v.s. Bruno ?

Seriously though, Marciano would have murdered him.

I know styles make fights and it's not always right to pick the "great" fighter simply because of his legacy, but I dont see how this match-up of styles is in Bruno's favour at all.
Marciano was the kind of intense natural fighting animal that would make Bruno look vulnerable and amateurish.
Bruno could punch and box a bit but he wasn't very relaxed and he wasn't comfortable with someone pure fighting him. I swear most of his problem was mental, but whatever, he just wasn't a natural fighter.
I followed this man his whole career. Loved the guy, cheered him on many a times. But a fighter like Marciano would have mashed him up, no doubt.

 

With all due respect, Marciano never fought anyone near analogous to Bruno in terms of size and strength. Of course, you could reverse this argument but they do not allow stumpy cruiserweights in the heavyweight division these days.

As far as vulnerability, Marciano looked vulnerable in each of his title fights (with the exception of Walcott II)... and not one of those opponents would even be a heavyweight today. If Walcott puts Marciano on the canvas, Bruno puts him through the canvas.

 

Yeah, Bruno was big and strong to epic levels. Marciano was tougher and more aggressive, and just too good.

No, Marciano looked solid mentally at all times. And physically he only momentarily looked stunned by Walcott and Moore.

Eddie Chambers is a top heavyweight today, so I guess the likes of Walcott and Charles would just have to carry an extra 15 pounds of fat to get your "2010 seal of approval" to fight at heavyweight.

I dont think you even believe that yourself.
My post was spot on, and the truth about dear ol' Frank Bruno. He was a well-drilled boxer with a strong physique and a big punch, but he lacked the instincts of a real class fighter.

 

Marciano "too good"? Sure, against midgets. How was he against 6-3 245 lb behemoths who were top ranked heavies for over a decade? Oh, that's right, he never fought one.

Momentarily stunned against Moore? Was that a momentary long count? Or when he was heaving out his guts trying to put away the old fart, I guess he was feeling fit as a fiddle.

Regarding the Chambers comparison, I wasn't saying that Walcott and Charles would not have a good chance against Bruno, only that Marciano would not. Drastically different models.

And I will take this last sentence to pat myself on the back and say how "spot-on" my post is.

 

Couldn't agree with you more - unfortunately for Frank - he was the kind of guy who needed his morale to be continuously boosted by his corner men (it is not a criticism but I don't think he really beleived enough in himself, and really had too much fear when he was in there) - he was the sort of guy who, fighting didn't come naturally to and simply forced a plan drilled into him by his corner team. Whereas Rocky really was one of the most natural, instinctive fighters, loved to fight and truly beleived that no man could beat him - one imagines even without his own great trainer in his corner he'd still be fine just looking to plough his man down - however long it took. I don't want to put down anyones opinion but in my eyes it is really ridiculous to entertain the idea of Bruno wining this one - to me its literally like racing a Dodge Viper with a shopping trolley (OK a lovable shopping trolley all the same (with a motorised engine attached maybe) - sorry :sad2

 

And Bruno only fought one great short swarming fighter, and got smashed up badly, TWICE.
Marciano looked good enough against a 6'2, 214 pound Joe Louis (past his best but still better than a Bruno), for us to guess that he could take on bigger fighters of Bruno's ilk. Bruno was only about an inch taller than Louis, and you can have him at 220, 235, 245, 248 whatever you want. All that extra bulk wont necessarily equate to heightened chances.

Bruno spent much of that "decade" as a top-ranked heavy either fighting absolute joke opponents or sitting inactive waiting for another undeserved title shot.

There was no long count, Marciano was up quick.
Say what you will about Marciano's finishing of Moore, I thought it impressive enough.
I've seen Bruno struggling to take out guys like Reggie Gross, a plumped-up light-heavyweight. Bruno couldn't even floor him. He laboured to beat some fighters who weren't even known to be durable (like a past-it Carl Williams). Admittedly he scored some big KOs too, although usually against horribly out-of-shape or third-rate opposition.

I disagree strongly.
You're imagining Bruno as some sort of Foreman-type destroyer who'd bomb out aggressive swarmers, when in fact Bruno was uncomfortable being crowded and having meaty overhand rights swung at him. In truth, Bruno did poorly, very poorly, against Tyson, and held more than fight back. Marciano would smell the anxiety on Bruno and just maul him to pieces. I have no doubt.

Yeah, fair enough. But I beat you to it.
The truth about Bruno is clear to anyone with eyes. He just didn't cut it. Bruno beat Marciano ? It's laughable.

 

100% correct.
Bruno was an awesome specimen, a fantastic athlete in the general sense, and dedicated to his physical training. He had natural strength and power. And they taught him how to box and he damn well learned it well.

But it was always a touch-and-go situation with Bruno in the ring, because if he fell behind or was badly shaken he was bound to lose the initiative and against a good world-class fighter he'd be guaranteed to lose the fight. The confidence and composure and self-belief could just ebb away from him rather rapidly. Even if he came back with some hard shots he'd be looking apprehensive and anxious about what his fate will be. But he developed a good jab and an ability to dictate a fight so he remained a formidable frontrunner who could set his rhythm nicely.

But that's no good against an intense, aggressive, unorthodox, awkward, swarming fighter like a Marciano, who is bound to bring a crises a minute and a whole lot of chaos to the occasion. There's NO WAY Frank Bruno would thrive under that sort of pressure.

 

Bruno would have his hands full, but he was a big man. He wasnt just blasted out by Tyson who was a faster stronger fighter in my opinion. Still feel Bruno wilts under the pressure if Rocky doesnt get nailed.

 

The Tyson/Marciano comparisons above are excessively ill-conceived. In his prime, Tyson threw lightning fast combinations of three, four... six punches, attacking forward off the balls of his feet . He worked behind an exaggerated bob n weave with good glove protection and a 72 inch reach. Almost conversely, Marciano was squat, slow and a bit predictable, throwing few shots at a time and fighting more off his heels, perpetually hindered by his 67 inch, even against the smaller heavies of his time. It's just a horrible match-up for him going against Bruno. And the Tyson comparisons reveal nothing but intellectual desperation on the counter-argument.

 

Well I have to agree to some extent. That crouching style would be suicide against a guy who has height reach, leverage and power in his righthand, but Marciano was suprisingly crafty in his approach, but fighters like Bruno were a new breed, and it took an extra dimension to get to them ala Mike Tyson who took the swarming style to another level both defensively and offensively.

 

Yeah. I can remember people talking the same way about Marciano, as some are on here now, when he was still fighting. Too slow. Too small. Reach too short. No skills. Crude. Predicting he would surely lose against his upcoming opponent. To listen to many boxing "experts" of the time talk, he was always the underdog. And then the actual fight would start...and...

 

Where is the analogous fighter in the 1990's heavyweight division? That is my question.

And if you want a preview to the answer... they were extinct.

 

I don't know of any other fighter who I would call an all-time great heavyweight, from 1885-2010, with a 67" reach.

 

That's because nobody has been that small during that time frame.....:think

Marciano is NOT gonna be successful at his size with the more modern dudes of today....... NO!

:-(

MR.BILL:deal

 

The time frame (1885-2010) I referred to was the entire world championship history of the heavyweight division during the Queensberry era. So you're saying Marciano would have only been a successful heavyweight in the era he fought in? You really think Charles, Louis, Moore, and Walcott were that unique in being badly equipped to handle such a small heavyweight as Marciano?