Does the Bruno of Tyson 1 beat the Tyson of Tyson v Bruno 2

Absolutely NOT.

Bruno was a good boxer, but he was very slow compared either to 1989 or to 1996 Tyson.

And he wasn't tough enough to outlast Tyson in a hard fight. He tried to clinch, it didn't help.

And Tyson's performance in 1989 was far from his best. Still more than enough to beat Bruno.

No version of Bruno beats Tyson from 1985 up to 1997.

 

No. Bruno didn't have the chin necessary to beat Tyson. He may do marginally better but eventually he is going to get hit.

 

Well mike tyson himself seems to think that there was no way he could have beaten bruno in 96 if bruno had come to win. Its in his book and he is quite adamant about it

 

No.
But he shouldve had a chance in the second fight but he was terrified.
He had a complete brain freeze that night.
That annulled any chances that he should've had.

 

Bruno would have to get a chin transplant to beat Tyson. This a guy that was knocked out by Witherspoon and Smith as well.

 

Nah, the only Tyson bruno can beat is the one who showed up against Lewis in 2002.

 

He may have given that tyson a bit more trouble than he did in the first fight but eventually tyson would have stopped him again. Bruno never really had the skills to beat tyson. He suffered a lot with self doubts and against tyson that s not going to help u. The one thing Bruno had was a big punch but tyson never got stopped by just one hit. It was always a accumulated beating that finished tyson and Bruno didn't have the speed or confidence tu do that. So I see this Bruno been stopped in the 6th round after given tyson a mauling fight with one or two good punches in there.

 

No.
I don't think there was such a massive difference between Tyson of the two Bruno fights.
At least no difference that would prove significant to Bruno's chances.
Remember, in the 1989 fight he was coming off the longest period of inactivity since he turned pro (8 months) and was his first fight without his old team. He wasn't as sharp as he'd been against Spinks, for example.
Another thing, Bruno was pretty lame in the first fight for most of the time. People remember him stunning Tyson briefly but from the opening bell onwards he was looking desperate and scared and just holding on, which is pretty much the same thing he did in the rematch.

 

Personally I wouldn't take much notice of what Tyson says in terms of him thinking he wasn't trained etc. He has an agenda that feeds the late 80s invincibility myth these days, and I don't blame him, he has a lot of work to do to erase that wreck of a post prison career. He openly makes excuses for the Buster Douglas and Holyfield losses whereas he used to just let the public do that for him, its like young people need the reminder. Time will probably be kind to his legacy though, it already is really, most rank him as a great heavy if not in the top ten but its an achievement in itself.

I would argue that the Bruno that fought Tyson 2 was better than his 89' self. he was more savvy and learned a few tricks but against Tyson it was always useless, just a few years earler he fought his best fight against Lewis. But he was a sitting duck with Tyson's speed and inside power.

Tyson wasn't great in the second fight but he still had enough power and speed to get Bruno out within five rounds. Stamina could have been an issue for post prison Tyson but Frank wasnt exactly known for his stamina either. Its a case of being made to measure, even a sub par Tyson wins.

 

Of course not, we're talking about Frank Bruno here. Somebody who always seemed to come up short in his biggest fights. This would be no exception

 

I hoped in the second fight Bruno would comeout swinging could of done it but it wasn't to be.

 

The only reason i ll say no is because the tyson of bruno one was also poor. Thats why big frank made a bit of a fight of it the first time. Or at least stunned him anyway.

Think he would have been dispatched easier against a tyson of a few years previously.

Tyson wasnt good in the second one tho. He got a bit of luck in that frank mentally broke down before even entering the ring. Then went for broke to get him out of there. Still had some skills and the power still there. Looking back i think tyson knew the longer he stayed in these fights post prison he,d eventually get found out. Just like holyfield did find him out not long later. But if it wasnt holyfield i think someone else might of done it. Dont really buy into the holyfield had his number theory personally. He did in the second career. Dont think he would have in the first career till it started falling apart for tyson anyway. Just my opinion on it.

If you look back on his first and second career he was a lot more erratic with his boxing in the second one. It was more controlled agression the first time round he actually looked like a well trained fighter where the knockout usually came naturally. In the second career...he was forcing his work. It became more about having a fist fight than boxing. Luckily for him his power and some of the skill he,d learned was enough to get him through till holyfield anyway. But for me too completely different fighters. He was still dangerous to anyone in the second career...but reckon his opponents we,re hand picked up till holyfield for a reason...even then holyfield looked on the slide himself at the time. But people are kidding themselves comparing tyson in his short prime to the guy who came out of prison

 

But make no mistake, Witherspoon and Smith were strong punchers.