Who would have won between George Foreman or Frank bruno during the 90`s?

I think both Old George and Young George both KO Bruno easily.

 

Bruno was big ( 6'3" ) with a huge reach (82") and massive power. He could box, had a terrific jab and a big heart. His problem was stamina and then freezing up ... it's an interesting fight and a very dangerous one for Foreman .. maybe it goes late and a battered Foreman pulls a Bonecrusher Smith or maybe the best Bruno lands early and really hurts a Foreman who never fought a man that size with that power since Ron Lyle .. I'm not sure.

 

Lyle more dangerous? Bruno got 38 KOs in 40 wins.

Moorer won every round until one punch.
Morrison beat Foreman by UD.
Stewart probably deserved a decision.
The same for Axel Schulz.
And Frank Bruno would beat him too.

 

Bruno certainly wouldn't go for a KO punching himself out.

 

Frankly, Bruno had better stamina and chin than Morrison. He could have pulled this off and done a better job than Alex Stewart did on George's face.

 

And Morrison gassed in near every fight he had over 5 rounds, including against cinder block feet Foreman who was too old to catch Tommy while he was running away with back turned.

 

Was it? That was 4 or 5 years after Ruddock had fought Tyson and a few years after being flattened by Lennox Lewis.
What significant win did Ruddock have after the Tyson fights?

 

Early 90's Foreman probably still beats Bruno.

I don't think Frank could have replicated Tommy Morrison"s stick and move plan as well as Tommy did, for instance. Morrison surprised me that night and boxed a disciplined fight.

Frank would have had a reasonable chance against even older George in 1995, 96 though and I might pick him in those years.

 

Bruno gets tired and KO'd.

 

Foreman opponent's in his comeback were handpicked. Bruno a level above the opposition selected .Similar to Stewart fight. However this time Bruno gets the dec.