The test in question took place in the U.K. in the late 80s, and involved Tyson, Foreman, Bruno and Ruddock. The order in which they scored is said to be: 1. Bruno 2. Foreman 3. Ruddock 4. Tyson.
Funny, I would have thought this answer would have received far more support than it apparently has. But then again, it's pretty obvious that some posters seem to have an agenda for whatever reason.
There are a lot of good posters here who you've disrespected and dismissed just because they don't agree with your opinion. Posters I might add who've studied the sport and are pretty knowledgable. To simply call someone an idiot for disagreeing with you is the level of *******s and *****s on the general forum. All I'm saying is if you want to be taken more seriously learn to debate with a level of respect and tact.
i do not need that anyone take me more or less seriously simply because i know that i know the history of boxing, and i know who is a liar or who is an ignorant. and i know who is the typical idiot who comment to look important. and he does not know what he is talking comments like this " tyson would ko foreman like he did to old holmes but in 2 rounds" "frank bruno was harder puncher than george foreman" this guy know **** about boxing. and believe me if i said "you are idiot" it was not without motive, it was because i had war with this guy before. an example.... if your hero is tyson and other guy say...." i think that tony galento would ko tyson in 2 rounds" probably you would call him idiot.
i think that this guy janitor has some culture on boxing but the guy invent **** to fight against me. basically because he hate me lol. he is not ignorant but he is liar and he use demagoguery. the liar is worse than the ignorant. some guys on this forum exposed their points with respect,WITH knowledge!!!,without demagoguery,without lies, then i will close my mouth because i must respect his opinion