Joe Bugner 'Overrated/Underrated'

In case it's lost on you, Dick Young was being sarcastic about Coopman and Dunn chosen as Ali opponents. He was taking the joke a step further by suggesting Cane.

Either way, Coopman and Dunn were a level above Cane in 1976. Especially Dunn, who would unquestionably have KO'd Cane.

 

I think Joe would have done well against George for a few rounds if he stood up and boxed him using his height and jab. Don't know how long he would have survived Foreman's power, but I wouldn't have written off Bugner early.

I kinda rate him near the best of the second tier heavyweight contenders of the late 60's early 70's. I think most would agree with me that Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Norton, and Larry Holmes were the best, whatever order you have. Some might consider Liston, Patterson and Leon Spinks to this group based on credentials. I don't know if I would add Spinks, but maybe Patterson and Liston.

Bonavena, Quarry, Lyle, Young, Shavers, Chuvalo, Ellis, Bobick, again in whatever order you rank, Joe Bugner is somewhere in this group I'd say.

 

Bull****! Dunn was far superior to Cane.

By 1976, Cane was losing to everyone in Europe. Dunn, by contrast, was on a winning steak, and had beaten McAlinden and Bunny Johnson. That's in addition to beating Roy Williams years earlier.

Cane was no match for Richard Dunn. None whatsoever.

That Cane was more durable means little: Dunn had the better hands, was faster and more aggressive.

 

After losing to Bugner, Cane was defeated by the mediocre Jose Urtain. What does that tell you?

Dunn was far, far above Cane in ability. Nobody denies this. Cane simply didn't have the punch or skill to exploit Dunn's weak chin.

As for Cane lasting longer than Dunn against Bugner, that's only because styles and physical attributes make the fights. Cane had a tougher chin than Dunn, so he stood up to more of a beating from Bugner than Dunn did. But still, Dunn was better than Cane, and by far, too.

Sorry Pepe. No kudos for you in this argument.

 

Also, by 1976, Cane was in his mid 30s and was physically burned out. He was over the hill. Maybe the younger Cane could have beaten Dunn, but in 1976, Dunn was that much better than Cane. Period.

 

that Bugner was overrated , literally , by whomever gave him a ranking/rating as well :yep:deal

 

and this shows u that at least prime 4 prime , but also post prime vs prime , even Dante Cane whoever he was , was still better than Richard Dung

 

Good question. Joe definitely had the ability to have achieved more than he did. He'd never have beaten Muhammad Ali in '75,even if he'd thrown caution to the wind,as some ascertain though. At that time Ali was still too good.

If Joe had FOUGHT TO THE FULL LEVEL OF HIS ABILITY during his his prime years of 1973-77,I see him beating everyone except for Ali,Frazier,Foreman,Norton,Young and Holmes. In other words,anyone but the six best heavyweights of the seventies. With a little more enterprise,he'd have decisioned Ron Lyle in their '77 bout.

 

It's like arguing over which dog turd smells sweetest. :rofl

 

:yep