Larry Holmes v Frank Bruno 1992

People need to realise old holmes was not a great fighter. He could no longer stop rated fighters, and he would not here. Old man holmes had a beter chin than carl the truth wiliams but was no beter a boxer at that point.

frank outboxed wiliams and ground him down. To be honest, holmes would not want bruno, "lazarus" holmes was still good enough to give the best contenders a workout but would get hurt here.

Bruno had his faults, the ocasion could get him but not against an old man who did not have the pace needed to gass out bruno. I say its bruno v bugner all over again.

 

Williams had been knocked down twice and lost to 8-4 trial horse Jerry Jones in 1992, and had been stopped by Tommy Morrison in 1993, three months before the Bruno fight.
These results are way below where even Holmes was in '92.

Bugner just turned up to fight Bruno for the payday.
Holmes was comparitively heroic in his lacklustre fight with Holyfield.

I agree, Bruno would hurt Holmes and could also outbox him for the early going, but Holmes would hang in there and start scoring more and more with his sneaky pot shots.
Bruno was too much of a front runner. Admittedly, I'm not certain of a Holmes victory, I could see a decision for either one.

 

I have been very critical of cleveland "big cat" williams of late and I see a lot of him in bruno. A big guy with great tools who came up short against less talented fighters when he stepped up.

However if I use the cat as an example here I would like to sugest say a 1961 fight between a slippery old stager Archie moore and big cat williams as how I would see frank bruno v lazurus holmes.

I think most people would pick wiliams over archie even though old man moore could still KO rated fighters like lavorante. Bruno was a beter contender than big cat ever was and he would be up against a slippery old stager who wasnt knocking out rated fighters. bruno by comparison would have a beter chance against lazarus.

Its just how I see it.