Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Bad_Intentions, Jul 10, 2007.
both @ heavyweight.
Charles by late TKO.
He would give Bruno a boxing lesson and stop him in the late rounds when he ran out of gas.
Charles in a wide points victory over 12.
Charles by TKO in 14 or 15 over the longer distance is where my money would be going.
Charles may have trouble getting out of the first two rounds, Bruno was much bigger and stronger. But providing Charles gets though the first few rounds, it will be timber Bruno around the 10th or 11th rounds.
You're my favorite mod. If you ran for governor of my state, I would vote for you.
I don't know. I lean towards Charles, but Bruno was so much larger and harder hitting and he wasn't technically bad, either. But Charles was a much better boxer. I will pick Charles to win.
Let's keep in mind that Bruno was stoppable anywhere from round 3 to round 11, but in cases like Witherspoon and Smith, he was not hit hard at all until the very end and was quickly dispatched. On the other hand, Charles did not hit as hard as any of the guys that stopped Bruno, but he did stop the big-punching Satterfield real fast, and KO'd the powerful and highly durable Moore and Kid Violent both by round 8. Bruno would give Charles a real scare early and win 2 or 3 rounds, but Charles would stop him in round 7 I say.
Charles would succumb to Bruno's massive physical advantages and get royally pummeled. 50-70lbs of muscle, 3 inches in height and 9 inches in reach. Bruno would batter him with the jab and knock Charles out whenever he forced Charles to make an error.
A little man like Charles power wouldn't even make Bruno flinch.
Yeah, for sure..
Weird one. I always have trouble ranking Frank in H2H matches, since he lost to most people decent, but acquitted himself well enough to make these type of matches difficult. Guys like Bonecrusher and 'Spoon are ones who I'd pick Charles to beat, and both beat Frank, but boxing isn't quite so simple as that.
That 9" reach advantage is substantial. I see that jab giving Charles (and all, but Holyfield, below 200lbs) massive issues. So does the power and weight. However, Charles was unequivocally the better fighter and his counters and cat-like reflexes with endless stamina would probably out-last Bruno. Bruno didn't like going the distance when he had everything his own way, so how's he gonna cope with a moving target who's capitalising on his mistakes over 15? I think that's his undoing and Charles stops him late, although he's down on points.
For the life of me, I cant understand why Bruno is bought up in these pages, and pitted against ( well in this case a ATG ) any Heavyweight champ other than the likes of , Sharkey, Carnera, Willard, for me he was poor, really poor as a champ, he patently learned zero about boxing from his first fight to his last, the stiffest of fighters, no body punching, not many hooks, no upper body movement, when caught by hard punches, would simply freeze, turn off, then slowly crumble to the canvas. dire.
Charles would outclass the muscle bound Bruno and check that chin in the later rounds for a stop - Charles would be ahead on the cards but a prime Charles puts the icing on the cake or should I say on the chin of Bruno
I think Charles is one of the all time great fighters, but that is a persuasive argument you have there
Charles by dec or late tko.