How good was Joe Bugner in the 1970s

No, you are right it was not vintage Frazier, but it still was at least the fourth best Heavyweight of a golden period in the division, and Bugner actually tried for a change.

 

I've said this before in earlier posts. Early 70's I had the highest hopes for this guy, seemed to have all the tools. Wrong!!! Many guys thruout history were like him...he simply didn't want to fight! His big fights? Went into a shell and got his arse kicked! *****!!! Sorry, but that's the only way I can say it. And don't even bring up his 80's-90's efforts which amounted to nothing...What was Joe's biggest win? He beat NOBODY outside of journeymen and over-the-hill contenders...look at his record. Paid good bucks to see him and Ali closed circuit in 1975 for the title...thank god we had Galindez-Ahumada and Monzon-Licata on the undercard. His best fight? Frazier? A losing effort against a guy who was fighting, for the first time in his career, after getting his arse handed to him? Bugner doesn't belong in any catagory of, "the best fighters who were never champ" rating...he was a 'something that never was'. Hell, he 'beat' a 37-38 year old Cooper in 71-72 and virtually all the pundits at ringside thought that 'enry had won.
Cooper's biggest win? How about a 1958 decision against a prime Zora Folley and that trumps anything mr. underachieving Joe EVER did!
Patterson-Ellis-Terrell prime beat this guy any day of the week...

My $0.02

 

Bugner has himself admitted that it was Cooper's fight. I liked his jab against Ali, though. It looked very sharp. But his overall performance was disappointing. Wepner, with less than half the talent, was a much better example of how you should conduct yourself when getting the opportunity of a lifetime.

 

Bugner has himself admitted that it was Cooper's fight. I liked his jab against Ali, though. It looked very sharp. But his overall performance was disappointing. Wepner, with less than half the talent, was a much better example of how you should conduct yourself when getting the opportunity of a lifetime.

 

Bugner has himself admitted that it was Cooper's fight. I liked his jab against Ali, though. It looked very sharp. But his overall performance was disappointing. Wepner, with less than half the talent, was a much better example of how you should conduct yourself when getting the opportunity of a lifetime.

 

Bugner would be favored over Mac Foster and Floyd Patterson?

Say what?

 

Bugner whipped Mac Foster in their 1973 London fight. It was a one sided decision, with Bugner winning at least eight of the ten rounds. The other two rounds were even.

I believe the 1970s version of Bugner whips the 1970s version of Floyd Patterson. Hands down. Bugner was simply too big and rangy for the smallish Floyd. Joe would have commanded this fight with his left jab. Anytime Floyd tried to accomplish anything, he would have been tied up by Bugner, who was the much bigger, stronger man at 6'4", 227 lbs. to Floyd's 6'0", 190 lbs.

Remember also that Bugner had a chin like a rock and his defense was pretty good. He was a highly competent boxer who pumped his left jab effectively. I cannot picture the aging Floyd Patterson succeeding against a prime Bugner.

 

I don't believe that Bugner was being truthfu when he "admitted" it was Cooper's fight. This is something Bugner said only recently, after being the beneficiary of a fundraiser in England for his medical problems. Cooper contributed to the fund, so Bugner was obligated to be gracious.

I have watched the Bugner-Cooper fight several times -- including once in slow motion -- and it is clear to me that the decision could have legitimately gone either way. The verdict in favor of Bugner was very fair. By far the most frequent punch landed in the bout was Bugner's left jab.

Basically, who is perceived as the winner depends on the viewer's scoring philosophy. Cooper arguably could have gotten the decision for ring generalship, as he kept Bugner on the run all night, constantly stalking him with the left hook. On the other hand, if you favor the guy who lands the most punches and scores the most points, Bugner looks to the be the winner, as he connected with his left jab all night long.

 

Let's look at it this way: just one year later Frazier totally demolished top contender Jerry Quarry. That tells us something about how dangerous Frazier still was in the 1973-74 period.

I think Frazier looked less than devastating against Bugner because of Bugner's huge size advantage and because of Bugner's style.

 

Kenmore, Bugner deserves to remembered as a legit contender, which he was. I'm not so sure he had the rock jaw though, the hook Frazier dumped him with was far from some of the ones that swelled Ali's jaw in their first bout, and had he followed up on Bugner the bout may have ended in the 11th. He held his hands high and usually this kept the bombs from landing on him. I was just thinking if he had fought Johanson in his prime, would have Ingo's bingo ko'd him?

 

The hook Frazier landed on Bugner in round 11 was devastating. There is no reason to believe that that hook was any less powerful than the ones that landed on Ali in 1971. What's the basis for comparison?

I do agree that Frazier could have finished Bugner off if he had followed up with another hook as Bugner was going down. But it's also true that his hook might have finished off any heavyweight in the same circumstances.

There is no doubt about Bugner's extraordinary durability. Interviews with contenders of the '70s who fought or sparred with Bugner attest to this.

Ingo could punch, certainly, but I don't believe he hit harder than Frazier, Lyle or Shavers, and we saw how Bugner withstood the bombs of those heavy bangers.

As for the outcome of a Bugner-Ingo fight, Bugner would have won comfortably. Ingo was no bigger than 6'0", 195lbs., and he would have been at a disadvantage against Bugner at long range boxing.

 

Jo Bugner was very good, he could have created more of a stir if he would have exploded during fights and let his fast hands go a lot more.. Joe always just did enough and in any other era could have easily obtained a championship. He had everything , height speed and when he wanted he had enough power to stop a lot of very good contenders with his mix of speed and strength... His son turned out a half decent heavyweight in the 90's but now he runs a fleet of night club and security doormen around the London area.. Look at what Joe did when he managed a comeback at a rediculous age , he beat a still useful Greg Page in Australia and a quite lively James Tillis too... He had no place in the ring with Bruno !!!!

 

I know some hard-core guys who feel Bugner was better than Quarry! I'm not sure if I can agree with that, but their reasoning goes Bugner did far better vs Frazier or Ali than Quarry did.

Bugner was good, but he lacked the power and aggression to make it to the top. If he was around today, he might be able to pick up a belt not held by a Klitschko. Yes—I think Bugner would have beaten Valuev. I view Bugner as a bottom level top 100 heavy.

 

That's basing a guy's legacy too much on his loosing efforts. Quarry beat the likes of Patterson, Lyle and Shavers. Bugner didn't beat anyone of that magnitude and actually lost to the latter two. So...

 

Kenmore, you have some really good points at that. The reason, and I may be wrong here, I didn't put the hook that put Bugner down with for instance the one that had Ali on ***** street in their first fight, is that Joe wasn't winding up from the waist as he had. I mentioned he was slow motion sparring in this fight by comparison and thats how I saw the motion he threw that hook with also. On Ingo's punch Patterson said it was harder then Liston's.