If the following guys had come along ten years earlier or later, which would possibly have had a better legacy? David Tua? Ken Norton? Frank Bruno? Jimmy Young?
Straight off the bat I'd say Bruno possibly has a better career coming along later, More cautious way of fighting in the heavy weight s ,few pressure monsters .
Ken Norton would become a belt holder in the 80 s and probably hold on to it longer than most. But he doesn't have those great fights with Ali to hold him against.
He wouldn't have a better legacy though the Ali fights pretty much carry his resume. Yes Norton may win a belt and have a few defences but he's not beating a prime Holmes of the early 80s and he certainly wouldn't beat a prime Tyson of the late 80s. And there's also some Heavyweights from that era that pack a wallop like Witherspoon, Weaver, Bruno, Bonecrusher, Coetzee, which are not all guaranteed wins for Norton. I don't think any of the Heavyweights listed really have a much better legacy changing decades.
In early 2000s he'd be facing Wladimir, Lewis, Tua, Vitali. And there's other tough Heavyweights like Brewster who has an iron chin and a high KO ratio that Bruno wouldn't necessarily be favoured against. Not to mention the very dangerous hard hitting Southpaw Sanders. Bruno wouldn't do that much better he'd still lose to the very best Heavyweights.
80s Tua would probably land his big fight with Tyson, lose, and fade out or become a steeping stone. 2010s Tua would be out of luck fighting a bunch of rangy big guys. Norton wouldn’t do well against prime Ali, Frazier, and Liston. He’d be dog meat for Tyson. Bruno would probably be better off not peaking at the same time as Tyson, forward or back. Jimmy Young does worse in any era where he doesn’t get to fight Forrman. Might not even see the top in 88.
What about Bruno ? He was a decent heavy in a power packed division . I feel he'd do slightly better in a later time for the reasons i mentioned.
