George Foreman vs Frank Bruno

Let's say 1994. Bruno could win a dangerously close decision but have to hold on for dear life at the last few rounds. Both men marked up, George Rollin forward all the time.
He could definitely win it here but my God, he'd have to fight the fight of his life.

 

I’m honestly not too comfortable going one way or the other. While Foreman was a better fighter than Bruno, Frank had some abilities which would make him a formidable foe for old George. He could turn out to be the type of challenge who gives him an Alex Stewart type effort.

 

This would would absolutely be a fight that had no baring on who the best heavyweight in the world was at any point in the 1990s.

George Foreman earned the right to become a celebrity fighter after doing so well against Holyfield. He was able to hand pick selected opponents after that point, and to be fair, he knew his limitations at that point.

George was a golden ticket. He could fight anyone he wanted. Frank Bruno was not one of the guys Foreman would have fought. And he got to choose.

George would not have fought Bonecrusher, witherspoon, Mercer. Bowe or Ruddock, or Lewis or Tucker. Not even Larry Holmes.

But there certainly isn’t anything on Bruno’s record to say the reason George would not select Frank is because Bruno would win.

George struggled with Alex Stewart. He just wouldn’t pick Frank. So it would not happen. Just wasn’t his taste.

But this is a 50-50 fight.

 

Foreman would knock Bruno out in 2 or 3 rounds.
It would be like the beginning of the Stewart fight but Bruno didn't have the recuperative powers and survival instincts of Stewart to get back into the fight.
Bruno was as strong as Foreman but he didn't have the composure or presence to impose himself.

 

Old Foreman was formidable. That said, had he not cherry picked almost all his opponents in his second career, he may have been a footnote.
Had he met a Lewis or Bowe in say, 1993, I think he'd take a bad beating and not fight after that.
Ditto had he met Tyson around 1990 or 1991.
I'm not sure if Bruno would be one of those like Stewart or Morrison who did unexpectedly well or not. But as said above, Foreman was not clamouring for names, unless those names had a belt.

 

Bruno was regarded as a bit of a joke at the time anyway, especially stateside, so he was hardly a name that would have boosted Foreman's reputation or ranking even. It's a lose-lose fight for Foreman, which arguably was the case with Stewart and Morrison, yes.

 

Bingo.

 

This fight would never have happened for political reasons.

Whichever man held the belt, would have seen the other as a high risk low reward option.

If neither held a belt, then why even bother?

 

It’s the fight that could never happen.

 

100% correct. George would lose to Lewis and Bowe and he knew it.

I agree. George was too far gone to be competitive with Tyson by the 1990s. He fancied his chances initially with Tyson... especially when he beat Cooney and Rodriguez.. but whilst the loss to Holyfield made him, and Tyson was in prison by then anyway, George would have known by then the extent of his own limitations.

Foreman was not clamouring for names unless they had a belt and were a lot smaller than he was. At his age George was prepared to give away youth so long as he was not giving away any weight and size. He was smart enough to know he wasn’t trading with enough speed to fight anyone who matched him for size and strength.

old Foreman was extremely limited. But he knew he was very commercial. And he knew his worth.