Jack Dempsey vs Prime Frank Bruno

With "His" skills. Lern too reed.

 

Same thing.

I’m happy to elaborate.

 

We have a case of Dempsey who never faced anything remotely like Bruno. Firpo was essentially bereft of skill and balance and accomplishment. Fulton was a hypejob.

In Bruno, we have a guy who faced something like Dempsey at his best, a magnified version at least in Tyson. Tho he had some early success we saw how that ultimately went.

This reality does little to clarify the situation. But I suspect Dempsey's lesser athleticism and chin than his counterpart on Bruno's resume would allow Bruno to last and have success at backing up Jack. It's tenuous and I'm only shading to one side.

 

Nah, Fulton was regarded as the top contender for a while, and had quite a few good wins over Langford, Moran and Smith.

Not saying he was a great, but much better than a hypejob.

 

Fulton can be regarded as a less impressive Gerry Cooney. Moran was well on the downside, having only won 2 of his previous 7 fights. Likewise, Smith would win only 2 of the remaining 10 bouts in his career. Langford was always in the position of having to be an overacheiver against the larger heavies. At 34, he was getting long in the tooth, a bit unmotivated and becoming Wills' favorite heavy bag.

If that's Dempsey's second best win, so be it.

 

I think we can legitimately question why it was that fighters who looked and fought like Frank Bruno didn’t crop up in Jack Dempsey time frame. First of all that stand up boxer puncher style hadn’t really developed by then. You had the Tommy Laughran, Gene Tunney type guys who were masterful boxers, a style where scoring blows were used to out number what the opponent did but they used a different stance. They held their hands differently. And this produced different angles more suited to more popular types of fighters from those days.

So from a stylistic point if view it seems odd to count against Jack that he had not faced guys using that stance when that style was not proved to be effective at that time.

And this is before the more curious question of why exactly it was that very physically strong men were unable to box effectively out of anything other than a brawler type style before the modern era. Heavy Powerhouse type men were historically not fighting to their strengths trying to become masterful boxers because what they had in raw strength they lacked in fluid athleticism. for generations it seemed those types of guys did not have enough wind to fight like that. It was a Maxim that nobody got around that. Against better men Frank Bruno himself proved this point. Famously gassing out.

So I can’t see how it can count against Dempsey that Bruno Was a type of fighter not yet proven to be effective in Dempseys day, who gassed out anyway.

I don’t think Firpo was that bereft of accomplishment. I think it was quite an accomplishment for a foreign fighter to become the second biggest draw in boxing after Jack Dempsey. Huge crowds came to watch Firpo in America before he fought Dempsey, his win over Brennan was a legitimate cause for challenger status. Was Bonecrusher Smith any less dangerous smashing Tim Witherspoon and Mike Weaver to pieces?

This statement doesn’t really stand up. All evidence points to Fulton being a good fighter. With wins as good as any of the guys Bruno beat. If not better.

Dempseys lesser athleticism? Do you think Bruno was a quicker athlete?

if you are only shading to one side on these kinds of points then it dosnt stand up very well I am afraid.

 

OK I agree that he "manufactured" the muscle weight. Not sure if part of that was PEDs.
But you said this in responding to my post. Instead of addressing what I corrected.
You are an excellent poster-if you are repeatedly wrong about his height, admit it.

 

Sorry dude. I was replying to more than one guy on that post. You are correct about Bruno’s height. He never was 6’4”. I have met him a few times. He is hardly a strong 6’3. More like 6’2. The part where I referred to 6’4” was in describing a theoretical opponent of Bruno’s weight.

 

I think he means less than Tyson.

 

Oh, yeah, I see that now.

Still comparisons with Dempsey and Tyson to conclude a result between Bruno and Dempsey is not an exact science. I don’t think Dempsey was realistically any slower than Tyson. I don’t think Tyson being harder to knockout than Dempsey is necessarily certain either.

 

That accomplishment was not Firpo's; it was Rickard's. Do not confuse excelling at the event with excelling at boxing. Beating a hapless Brennan in his 63rd and next to final fight was no great accomplishment, certainly not along the lines of what Smith accomplished against prime versions of Smith and Weaver.

See my previous post. Fulton was a lesser Gerry Cooney... at best. He beat "name" fighters on the steep decline only to be subsequently exposed as rather glassy of mandible.

No, I think the closest correlative to Dempsey on Bruno's record, that being Tyson, was a quicker, stronger and more forceful athlete.

 

Was Bruno ever really above Cooney though..

 

Bruno was a bumm...... i thou ght some of you posters actually boxed in stead of bodybuild..I lossed respect here

 

Drink much?

 

Yes, he has a deeper resume of boxers with an actual pulse.

And Fulton was only a pale facsimile of Cooney at that.