1986 Frank Bruno versus 1979 Mike Weaver ..... who would win ?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Unforgiven, May 2, 2021.

  1. Stevie G

    Stevie G Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    21,345
    916
    Jul 17, 2009
    I see this one playing out similarly to Weaver's bout with Gerrie Coetzze.
    Bruno rocks Mike quite a few times during the early rounds. Tires after the midway point then Mike stops him at any point from the eighth onwards.
     
    Richard M Murrieta likes this.
  2. William Walker

    William Walker Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,263
    6,342
    Apr 9, 2020
    I am not being neutral here. I make no pretentions about my dislike of Bruno. I think Weaver was stronger based on the fact that I have seen him take out or drop a number of guys with a single punch, whereas I cannot say the same of Bruno.
     
    Richard M Murrieta likes this.
  3. Bah Lance

    Bah Lance Active Member Full Member

    617
    684
    Apr 29, 2019
    The tougher guy wins here. Weaver. Bruno would box well, but get tired, get caught, and implode.

    Unless they have the ref from Dokes/Weaver I working this.
     
    Richard M Murrieta likes this.
  4. Entaowed

    Entaowed Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,702
    1,295
    Dec 16, 2012
    I am not saying anyone should be neutral in terms of making a choice.
    What my statement means-& folks normally mean in this context-is your judgment seems clouded about the outcome because one of the constituent judgements you make seems clearly opposed to the evidence.

    In this case though, your explanation shows that you are just using the wrong definition of "stronger".
    Let us assume that in this case the results of even a single punch is indicative of how hard someone hits.
    This may not be the case, if the person who does it is more efficient in terms of landing in more often in a vulnerable area, softening them up first, having it be fast enough or sneakily deployed so it is not braced for...
    But granted those who are better at 1 punch knockouts-assuming a similar level of resistance to punches of their victims, such as around the same weight-certainly tend to hit harder.

    Even so, how hard anyone hits is very different from physical strength.
    Tons of athletes, especially those who have excellent genetic potential, weight train, take PEDs...Are stronger than most boxers.
    Many are much stronger than virtually any or any boxer ever.
    Being a huge weightlifter &/or juiced to the gills does not mean they even hit particularly hard.
    Primo Carnero was a strongman who was massive before PEDs were even invented, he did not hit particualrly hard for his size.


    I do not know who would win.
    Weaver was better at one punch knockouts, although Bruno was easily stronger.
    Also from the testimony of many Bruno hit exceedingly hard, so I am skeptical that Weaver hit harder.
    Although it was likely at least close.
    And pound for pound, Weaver was better.
    Whether he would tend to win head to head-espeically considering how his record was relatively checkered even before the end of his career...

    I dunno.
     
    William Walker likes this.
  5. Bah Lance

    Bah Lance Active Member Full Member

    617
    684
    Apr 29, 2019

    You really think Bruno was better when he was heavier? 247 lb Bruno of Tyson 2 was in his last pro fight and was gassed after the first round.

    The SIZE obsession on this forum is deranged. Bruno in his youth and at a more reasonable weight was absolutely better than the sloth that comeback Tyson iced.

    Unforgiven doing Bruno a favor by picking the one the could actually move a little around the ring.
     
  6. Seamus

    Seamus Devotee of the Little Red Book Full Member

    44,413
    16,207
    Feb 11, 2005
    It is interesting that the guy with 12 stoppages on his record is being sold as the more durable guy in this match-up. And yes, I know Mike went too long.

    Likewise, it is interesting to see mention of the guy with a 42% KO rate as having "awesome power" while the other fellow had double that rate.

    And I know, boxing is not a stat driven sport... but it is interesting.
     
    GOAT Primo Carnera likes this.
  7. William Walker

    William Walker Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,263
    6,342
    Apr 9, 2020
    You are right. I should have clarified. I also agree Bruno was a stronger man. And even if Weaver hit harder, there are many examples of his fights where guys who hit lighter than he did were able to manhandle him. The fights with Tate and Coetzee for instance (although Coetzee was probably almost as powerful a puncher as Weaver).

    I do not ever have total faith in Weaver due to passiveness and subpar chin, but Bruno is a fighter that was full of flaws imo, and I just generally tend to favor Weaver in this instance. Weaver is not a heavy favorite for me in this fantasy matchup.
     
    Richard M Murrieta and Entaowed like this.
  8. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    25,325
    4,791
    Dec 31, 2009
    Overall I would say johansson was better than Weaver. He certainly made a greater impression on the history of the sport. Beat the right men at the right time. You can’t knock Ingo as much as one can knock Weaver.
     
    Richard M Murrieta likes this.
  9. Entaowed

    Entaowed Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,702
    1,295
    Dec 16, 2012
    He was better earlier, but I was giving the difference in lean weights.
    Some are obsessed with size-others deny that it tends to be an advantage.
    But you are not being present for what the individual says when you use my mere observation as evidence for what you may be on automatic pilot for.

    Note I said it is hard to pick here.
    You are railing against what some are like, or you preconception of them, I showed no size obsession.

    Just like when I note how people over state weights-some tend to do it either way based upon what serves their argument-I am trying to be fair & accurate.
     
  10. Unforgiven

    Unforgiven Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    55,352
    16,220
    Nov 24, 2005
    Yes, it shows the difference between the two extremes, Bruno being a carefully managed, manufactured and protected commodity from day one, while Weaver fought he way up old school style from clubfighter/'opponent' level.

    Mike Weaver actually lost his first 2 pro fights, and was 6-6 after 12 fights.
    He's basically Rocky Balboa in the 1970s, but black and based in California. .... and not a fictional character.

    Bruno won the ABA championships at age 18 televised by BBC and was signed up by the leading management/promotional cartel in the UK, given living and training expenses, fed and trained, then carefully matched so he could knock out overmatched bums on television,
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2021 at 4:04 AM
  11. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    25,325
    4,791
    Dec 31, 2009
    The cartel also paid out for the cost of sending Frank across the Atlantic to Borgata for a necessary operation on Bruno’s eye so that he could pass a medical. Otherwise Bruno never would have got licensed to fight. It kept Bruno out of the ring for many months. It must have cost a small fortune. But another example of the no expense spared nature of the project.