Which of these British Heavyweights in their prime does David Haye beat?

Some people are forgetting how average Frank Bruno was...

 

Interesting post and a tough question. My opinions would be
L Lewis - would beat Haye by KO
Frank Bruno - I would favour Bruno here by KO also
Gary Mason - People underate Mason because he wasnt a world champ but he was a very good HW. Tough one but I would go with Mason
Henry Cooper - Haye easy KO. Cooper was too small for Haye (dont mention Ali) and would be cut up before being KOd
Herbie Hide - Really this one could be whoever lands first. I have a feeling that would be Haye. Haye KO
Danny Williams - Depends which Williams shows up as to how the fight goes, either way I think Williams could win but wouldnt win. I think Williams would get too taken in at the pre fight hype and freeze on the night. Haye on points or late KO
Brian London - Havent seen enough of London to give a fair comment
Joe Bugner - Haye on points in a dull fight. Bugner takes a great shot but gets outpointed

 

Haye was average. Bruno fought in a good HW era.

 

I'd sooner have Bruno's career than be the self-proclaimed (seen as it was never proven) 3rd best HW in perhaps the division's worst ever era.

Take the Klits out and the division is absolutely gash. Why people want them gone I've no idea.

 

Its a difficult one,I see your point.You could call him average but then the level you are comparing him to at his best is much higher than it is today.He could box a bit and showed that against Lewis,ok he came up short but would he have if he were fighting say Wlad?Bruno gets overrated and underrated.

 

Compared to Haye, Frank was evidently the better operator.

 

At heavy weight maybe.


Frank got beaten every time he stepped up. The opposiion was better then though.

 

Something that gets left out of the old era comparisons is that fighting in a specific era may have forced a different style. Haye may have been forced to tidy up his style technically. Nowadays Bruno would probably be one of the best in the world.

 

The only folk that beat him would beat Haye in my opinion.

 

You can rate Bruno in a similar way to how you can rate Hatton.

Frank lost to Lewis and Tyson, Hatton lost to Pac and Mayweather - obviously Frank has two other losses, one of which was a particularly shocking defeat considering what happened in the previous 9 1/2 rounds, and the other was to a fighter of a similar/slightly better ability.

What I mean is that it ought to be blatantly obvious, stylistic matchups aside, who Bruno ought to be able to beat, similarly with Hatton.

Across the 135-147 divisions in the past decade, he'd always give Tszyu a run for his money, but would be banged out early by a Mosley.

Bruno isn't really a particularly bad stylistic matchup for anyone other than a man who struggles with the jab and can be hit with a right hand..... oh, and the obvious requirement for a decent beard.

Haye can be tagged, and tagged hard. When Bruno lands.... :hi:

 

Haye's chin isn't that bad.

 

Cruiser is a shite division with little historicalrelevance. Mormeck wasn't all that. Nor was Enzo. So yes, Bruno was better.

 

I dint think it was very good. He just learned to take the sting off it by the time he got to Wlad, by running away.

 

It was an awful performance, no doubt. But I don't see what else he could have done. He couldn't solve Wlad's puzzle with the tools he had.

 

As the 200lb limit is relatively new it would be quite interesting seeing how many cruisers Bruno fought. Haye was abetted amateur and much better pro. Too fast for Frank, Haye would stop him late on.