Would You Give Frank Bruno A Chance, Against Wlad Klitschko??

Hahaha - Well, from what I know of Quarless, he had fast hands and carried a bit of a dig. He was apt to catch the less experienced unawares, perhaps. I think he was one of Lewis' early opponents.

 

Big puncher v **** chin? Bruno has a punchers chance.

 

Other than Pannell, Peter is the only opponent of Wlad's to have knocked him down and not finished the job. If Wlad gets hurt, he tends to end up losing by stoppage (Puritty, Sanders, Brewster, Joshua).

A Wlad/Peter or Wlad/Joshua bout wouldn't look anything like a Wlad/Bruno bout. There is no similarity in styles between Bruno, Peter and Joshua and I think it's quite debatable as to whether Joshua is actually better than Bruno.

Either one of Bruno or Wlad carries the power to end it and I really cant see it going past 7 rounds.

It's who hurts who first, in my view, and why I think it's a genuine 50/50 bout.

 

I agree to an extent but i think Wladimir did show some more survival instincts than Bruno did, as i said Bruno would never survive the heavy knockdown vs Joshua and then go 11 rounds especially at the age of 40 after long lay off. And surviving 3 knockdowns vs Peter in a tough fight.

Bruno also never stopped any elite fighters where as Wladimir did plenty of times.

As for Joshua/Bruno i think Joshua is significantly better than Bruno based on his superior boxing skills and achievements.

 

Boxers all age differently. Whether Wlad was 40 when he faced Joshua is neither here nor there. He kept himself in good shape and was able to put on this last hurrah. And, let's not pretend that Joshua piled it on to Wlad, non-stop after the 5th, up until the 11th. They went back to fencing for a few rounds after a gassed-out Joshua survived the 6th and 7th.

I'd agree that Wlad cultivated better survival instincts - but barely - and his main instinct was to clinch for dear life in the face of an offensive threat, if his safety-at-range strategy failed him.

Again, if Wlad got tagged he was usually on his way to a loss; same as Bruno.

Which elite fighters did Wlad beat, again?

Come to think of it, what has Joshua done that he'd have been able to repeat in the eras of Witherspoon, Lewis and Tyson?

Head-to-Head cares little for what's been recorded on paper.

 

I mainly meant ranked top 10 fighters i don't believe Bruno stopped any ranked top 10 fighter unless i'm mistaken.

I agree that Joshua probably wouldn't beat that gauntlet of fighters, although maybe he'd have a chance against the fat version of Witherspoon.

But again i feel like Joshua has more dimensions as a fighter than Bruno.

 

Well, he absolutely leveled Ring rated Coetzee. Him failing to stop Oliver McCall is no great shame, either (his one stoppage loss coming at the hands of Lewis in their rematch), and McCall was hurt by Bruno.

Moreover, I'm pretty sure Puritty, Sanders and Brewster hadn't stopped a ring-rated opponent either, before taking Wlad out.

It's not really a meaningful barometer.

Well - let's be honest - Joshua hasn't even run the gauntlet of fighters in his own era.

I'm not entirely sold on Joshua as being all that skilled. But he does move well for a big man, and he does look good at times, but I've seen him outfought by an unranked fill-in and drift through a bout he believed he was doing well in, whilst being comprehensively out-boxed.

His best performance to date has been against Klitschko and his successes in that bout came when he just went into a round to scrap, rather than box and overthink his approach. His post-Ruiz Jr performances have been formulaic and underwhelming.

Bruno is basic but he's the better schooled fighter of the two, which sees him do those basic things very well, in turn enabling him as an offensive threat. Combined with his power and sheer physical strength, he has a good shot at most world class heavyweights, in my opinion.

 

Was Coetzee rated in the top 10 in 86 ? i wasn't sure.

True but Sanders was always a very dangerous skilled fighter who was Southpaw, and Brewster went on to have a decent little run as champion. And even Purrity had shown some qualities like dropping Morrison twice and earning a draw.

I think all 3 would have a good chance of beating Bruno, and i'm talking about Purrity vsing a green Bruno like Wladimir was vs him.

Ring rated opponents don't always mean anything which is true, but Wladimir was way more consistent at top level than Bruno. I tend to think the more highly accomplished and skilled fighter in Wladimir would be favoured over Bruno.

Yeah but Bruno wouldn't run gauntlet in this era either he loses to Usyk, Fury, Wilder. And he could easily lose to the likes of Ruiz, Ortiz, etc.

I think he's more varied than Bruno in regards to combination punching, better punch variety, more athletic, better all around boxing skills. Bruno probably has a better jab and a straighter right hand, but i can't really see much else that Bruno does better than Joshua.

Overall i just think Wladimir is better than Bruno in most departments, and whilst Wladimir is a bit fragile and could be caught early by Bruno. My money would be on Wladimir by stoppage mid to late rounds.

 

While he undoubtedly had a hefty punch, and Wlad suffered a fair share of knockdowns and stoppages, it’s hard for me not to see this as the usual Bruno scenario in big event fights….starts well, tires quickly, is easily tied up and stopped in the middle rounds. At the end of the day, he was 1-4 in world title fights, stopped in all of those losses, and his one world title win was one of the only two times in his career that he went the distance. He was holding on for dearly life in the last few rounds against McCall.
I think Wlad would out jab him, tie him up and lean on him when in close range, maybe overcoming a wobble or too.

 

I would say that Wladimir Klitschko would be the favorite in my estimation. Frank Bruno with his punch has that chance of landing something big, but I would not count on that happening.

 

#6

Wlad is the only person of note that Sanders beat, so how dangerous was he really?

Dangerous to Wlad, that's for sure.

I quite like Brewster but there's nothing that sets him apart from Bruno.

So you reach for the one other freak result on Puritty's resume to bet on him against Bruno?

The guy was regularly dropping decisions to novices and only managed win streaks against those novices who had somehow managed to accumulate losing records in their then brief careers.

The only reason people even know the name 'Ross Puritty' is because he knocked Wlad out.

There's faint evidence to back that opinion up, though - while we all know that the two things all three of them have in common is beating Wlad and that Wlad was the best scalp on their records, they did little to nothing of note outside of this. Only Brewster had some reasonable additions in the form of a few low-level WBO defenses but, relatively, they're nothing to write home about.

The only reason two of the three became belt-holders in the first place was because they beat Wlad. And, at 24-0 and #5 WBC ranked, Wlad was hardly a freshly germinated beansprout, when he met Puritty, was he?

Yes, but Wlad didn't fight anyone at the level that Bruno did - bar perhaps (and at a stretch) Fury - and he lost that one anyway.

Sorry but that^ is actually quite a careless thing to post. We know Bruno fought two top-10 ATGs (one of them twice) and another top-40 and quite possibly top-30 ATG in Witherpoon, but I'm to believe that "Bruno wouldn't run [the] gauntlet in this era either"?

Bruno didn't easily lose to Witherspoon, Tyson (I) or Lewis but he could easily lose to Ruiz Ortiz etc.?

Sure.

That just reads as you liking the look of Joshua more than you do Bruno, which is fine. It just doesn't speak to his actual effectiveness at the highest level. If one reaches a level in which they look good at and then stays there, while passing on meeting their top-level peers, in their own era, it speaks volumes.

Wlad presided over one of the worst eras in heavyweight history with little of worth to measure against. He wasn't that hard to find when attacked - even a caveman like Peter was able to demonstrate that - few others did. Bruno would and bring with it some genuine danger.

It's a 50/50 fight.

 

Of course he's dangerous ? how many hard hitting quick handed Southpaws have there been in the Heavyweight division ? i would think 6'4 230+ skilled Southpaw would be dangerous to most Heavyweights.

No there isn't but i think Brewster has a good chance of beating Bruno.

I don't know why you think that's so unbelievable ? were talking about a green inexperienced Bruno vs tough very durable journeyman who beat Wladimir, Hipp, Gonzalez, drew with Tommy Morrison, and went the distance with pretty much every notable Heavyweight. Puritty is better than his record suggests, and has one of the best chins in the Heavyweight division never off his feet vs the likes of Sanders, Wladimir, Vitali, Morrison.

Would Bruno be the favourite against Puritty ? yes. But is it totally unreasonable to think Puritty could take a green Bruno into later rounds, and stop him after Bruno gasses ? possibly yes i don't see that as an outlandish opinion. Bruno only ever went the 12 round distance once, and that was literally marathon for Bruno hugging onto McCall for dear life.

You misunderstood what i said when i said "could easily lose". I didn't mean in the way that Bruno would get dominated. I meant that they would be very dangerous fights for Bruno that he "could easily lose". I personally think fights vs Ortiz, Ruiz, would be toss up with no real clear favourite.

Honestly i don't even like Joshua much especially after his antics vs Usyk, but i think he's a better all round fighter than Bruno. If Bruno would of got tagged by Wladimir like Joshua did in the 6th round Bruno would've been stopped.

Yes it was a weak era i agree but let me ask you this, would Bruno of had all the successful title defences Wladimir had ? i don't think so.

I also don't see it as a 50/50 fight because in my mind Wladimir is a better fighter than Bruno, would Bruno have a chance in the fight ? absolutely. But Wladimir should be the favourite for being the better fighter overall.

 

I didn’t argue that Sanders wasn’t dangerous but, given that Wlad is the only name of note in his W column (unless you want to include an unfortunate, drug-addled version of Cooper) asking just how dangerous you think Sanders was seems a fair question to me. He really has nothing other than his destruction of Wlad to extrapolate from and establish his status as a lethal weapon.

Sanders had potential, for sure, but the reality here is that he knocked over a litany of cans - and Wlad. That's it! There’s nothing else to suggest he was dangerous, bar perhaps the eye-test and some of that eye-test footage might well disappoint the spectator.

So, it seems to me that, if you’re going to declare Sanders as dangerous, in order to rationalize one of Wlad’s defeats, then it would help if there were a corroborating case. Instead, it seems that the subject of the rationalization (Wlad's defeat) and the case for Sanders’ lethality are one and the same.

The truth is that it doesn’t matter whether one believes that Puritty, Sanders and Brewster would have a good chance against Bruno or not (I happen to think not and the Purity argument is not unbelievable; just amusing, since it has taken the discussion into layers of mediocrity that even Bruno doesn’t deserve to be compared with). It just doesn’t factor into the matter of whether or not Bruno can replicate their success against Wlad.

That is, it has no bearing on the fact, for example, that Brewster beat Wlad and that Bruno might be able to do the same.

I mean, anything is possible, but an appeal to possibility forgoes the probability, no? I mean you cite Gonzalez and Hipp as evidence for Puritty’s chances - but really? I’m not going to make a case for Bruno against those guys. It’s just unnecessary.

OK - So, again - anything is possible?

And my main objection was to you stating that Bruno wouldn't run gauntlet in this era. He would. He might not win during the run, but he’d run it, all the same.

Again, it is possible but you can’t know that. No one can. Joshua doesn’t fare too well when caught either. I am not going to read into the KD from another fight and try to superimpose that on a completely different matchup. It’s not a useful way to look at things.

Does this matter in a head-to-head matchup? I mean, if I had been making a case that Bruno was better than Wlad or could have mirrored his career, then I might see the point of this question but I haven’t attempted to make any such case - nor would I.

I haven’t even made Bruno a favorite in the matchup.

What I have maintained is that Wlad was notably vulnerable to power, which Bruno most certainly carried and did seek to use, and this makes him a bigger threat than most of the opponents on Wlad’s ledger. Bruno was vulnerable to heavy firepower too so, in my view, this one isn’t going the distance - nor is the bout going to last too long.

I have also maintained that Bruno was as effective, if not more so, than Puritty, Sanders and Brewster and on that basis and with the precedent of their respective successes against Wlad, I do not think it unreasonable to call this a 50/50 bout.

That’s fine. It’s obviously not an unreasonable position to take, given Wlad should be considered the better fighter. But both were powerful punchers and both were vulnerable once tagged. In cases like this, I am more than happy to explore the art of the possible rather than an appeal to possibility - the latter of which can be applied to just about any matchup in boxing.

In the case of the former, I am encouraged by Bruno’s demonstrable power, as well as his losing efforts against his elite opposition (Witherspoon, Lewis and Tyson), where he was able to offer problems to varying degrees to all three (mostly Witherspoon and Lewis) and during which he absorbed a fair bit of punishment, as well. And, while he had a strong jab (and I believe the jab is key to this fantasy matchup), he did show a collection of other punches in his arsenal. The straight right being the obvious one, as well as a left-hook. But he also had a handy right-uppercut, overhand right and was happy to whale away to the body if the opportunity arose.

Add to this that I don’t rate Wlad’s skills as highly as many others do on the forum and I do not rate him that much at all head-to-head, and to my mind, this is a crucible in which either fighter can take their chance. Aggressive power punchers will always be a problem for Wlad and with Bruno involved I think this has an impact on the complexion of the bout and the probabilities of outcome.

Joshua knew this. It’s why on the two occasions against Wlad he came out from his corner with mean intentions and just threw leather at Wlad, he scored with big successes - with the second occasion leading to the stoppage.

 

Prime Bruno would certainly have a better chance vs a 2005 and pre Wlad, than he would a 2006-2013 Wlad, imo.