10 british heavyweights of all time

Rory McCloskey · Post by **Rory McCloskey** » 30 Oct 2005, 00:28

i think this was a great idea brockton...

1) Lennox Lewis
2) bob fitzsimmons(maybe said he was new zealand but facts are he was british.)
3) tommy farr
4) frank bruno
5)james figg

Post by **The Law** » 30 Oct 2005, 02:38

My mate Horace Notice would definitely have made it onto that top ten if he didn't have to retire due to a detached retina

Rory McCloskey · Post by **Rory McCloskey** » 30 Oct 2005, 11:17

is it possible to put james figg anywhere on this list? or is it just modern day boxers..

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 30 Oct 2005, 11:27

mercman wrote:
Bugners performance is not half as bad as people made out. Its not like he quit in his corner or laid down...
Good point. I've seen Bugner's title challenge and being outpointed by Ali in '75 wasn't a disgrace. I've also seen Bugner's '73 fight with Joe Frazier: he was very game and brave and gave a near peak Frazier a real fight. I've never seen Bugner's '73 fight with Ali though. People say he did much better than he did in Kuala Lumpa two years later. Anybody seen it and got any views?

Yes I've got it and Bug gave a good account of himself despite getting badly cut early on.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 30 Oct 2005, 11:28

lawllb wrote:My mate Horace Notice would definitely have made it onto that top ten if he didn't have to retire due to a detached retina

I agree, Horace had good skills. Whats he up to these days?...

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 30 Oct 2005, 12:16

5)james figg

great choice rory!!!!!!!!! the man looked great on film, he bobbed and weaved well, very fast hand speed, and had a devastating right hand that coiuld fell any heavyweight.

to rate bugner over lewis is a joke IMO. if they ever fought lewis would defintely beat bugner, maybe by knockout.

- i rate henry cooper over bugner, bugner couldnt even beat an old cooper without getting lucky decision.

sowhat if bugner survived against foreman, lyle, ali. thats all he did was survive. thats becuase he had a good chin. lewis would be more likely to win against those guys than bugner would.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 30 Oct 2005, 13:02

You really need an attitude transplant Brockton... you seem to find any view that conflicts with yours to be 'laughable'.
And this from someone who rates Herbie Hide amongst the top ten British heavyweights of all time!!!.
Have you ACTUALLY seen Bugners fights with Ali, Frazier and LYLE???.... ??? he didn't just survive, these were competitive fights... I know I have seen them, and doubt that you have. If you have and you really belive what you say then your knowledge of boxing needs to expand quite a bit. You don't really know what you're seeing. Have you seen the Cooper fight??.... it was a close decision but Bugner deserved it and remember while Henry was 37 he was still a very tough and capable fighter while Bugner was barely 21.
Do you honestly think that someone who was koed by Rahman and Mccall could go the distance with Frazier???. Now thats laughable!. Lewis was even scared to death against a doped up Tyson.
And Bugner never fought Foreman.
I find your views on Bugner a joke.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 30 Oct 2005, 15:47

mercman wrote:I've got to agree with Silkov on this. Big time. It seems fashionable to slate and berate Bugner but I really wonder if people who do this have ever seen any of his fights, particularly 1970s ones. The decision over Cooper was unpopular mainly because Henry was a national institution not because Bugner didn't deserve to win. It was close but Bugner shaded it alright. He won fair and square. I also agree that Bugner's performances against the top American fighters of the 70s were praiseworthy. He did well against some all time greats.

And incidentally I think Joe Bugner would have toyed with Herbie Hide. There is no comparison.

Indeed! to compare Bugner with Hide is ridiculous. Hide wouldn't have made it as a sparring partner in the 70s, he is a complete joke to be honest. It does annoy me when people state fighters when they obviously haven't even seen them in particular fights. Its fashionable to knock Bugner, but most of the people who run him down haven't seen his bouts. Ofcourse its true that Bugner didn't always have the right attitude but the fact remains that he gave his best performances against two of the greatest heavyweight champions of all time. Hardly a bad acheivement really.

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 30 Oct 2005, 15:51

I agree. Bugner is a bit under-rated these days.

To say he only 'survived' against Ali (1), Frazier and Lyle suggests the poster needs to actually see the fights. Bugner was in those fights, particularly the Lyle and Frazier ones.

Bugner's problem, and if you read the reports from the 70's they bear this out, was that he never seemed to give 100%. I'm not sure that it was because Ulric Regis died after his bout with Bugner as much as the fact that Bugner was stopped in his first pro fight and as such always liked to keep a little bit in reserve.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 30 Oct 2005, 16:09

Collins2000 wrote:I agree. Bugner is a bit under-rated these days.

To say he only 'survived' against Ali (1), Frazier and Lyle suggests the poster needs to actually see the fights. Bugner was in those fights, particularly the Lyle and Frazier ones.

Bugner's problem, and if you read the reports from the 70's they bear this out, was that he never seemed to give 100%. I'm not sure that it was because Ulric Regis died after his bout with Bugner as much as the fact that Bugner was stopped in his first pro fight and as such always liked to keep a little bit in reserve.

I don't think you can underestimate the effect that having an opponent die can have on you. Especially when you are as young as Bugner was at the time and just at the start of your career. For me Bugner showed simular traits that Eubank later did after the Watson fight... pulling back after hurting his opponent being the main one.
Later on Bugner became even more disenchanted because of the negative media he recieved. In a way Bugners treatment by the British media is simular to how Larry Holmes was treated by the American media... because both men were following such beloved figures and were never really forgiven for that by some sections of the public.
The fact that Bugner was able to run up a good string of wins against the likes of Bey, Page etc when he was touching his 40s in the late 80s seems to be lost on many people. When Bugner went to Austrailia and found himself immensely popular, he actually gave his most impressive performances since the mid and late 70s.... he was actually being talked of as a challenger to Tyson at one point!...

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 30 Oct 2005, 16:50

silkov wrote:
Collins2000 wrote:I agree. Bugner is a bit under-rated these days.

To say he only 'survived' against Ali (1), Frazier and Lyle suggests the poster needs to actually see the fights. Bugner was in those fights, particularly the Lyle and Frazier ones.

Bugner's problem, and if you read the reports from the 70's they bear this out, was that he never seemed to give 100%. I'm not sure that it was because Ulric Regis died after his bout with Bugner as much as the fact that Bugner was stopped in his first pro fight and as such always liked to keep a little bit in reserve.
I don't think you can underestimate the effect that having an opponent die can have on you. Especially when you are as young as Bugner was at the time and just at the start of your career. For me Bugner showed simular traits that Eubank later did after the Watson fight... pulling back after hurting his opponent being the main one.
Later on Bugner became even more disenchanted because of the negative media he recieved. In a way Bugners treatment by the British media is simular to how Larry Holmes was treated by the American media... because both men were following such beloved figures and were never really forgiven for that by some sections of the public.
The fact that Bugner was able to run up a good string of wins against the likes of Bey, Page etc when he was touching his 40s in the late 80s seems to be lost on many people. When Bugner went to Austrailia and found himself immensely popular, he actually gave his most impressive performances since the mid and late 70s.... he was actually being talked of as a challenger to Tyson at one point!...

I'm not underestimating the effect of causing the death of a fighter may have had on Bugner. I'm suggesting another reason which you appear to have dismissed out of hand in your usual arrogant style.

If the sole reason Bugner was holding back was because he killed Regis why did he NOT hold back against Dunn and later Winston Allen?

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 30 Oct 2005, 17:32

Collins2000 wrote:
silkov wrote:
Collins2000 wrote:I agree. Bugner is a bit under-rated these days.

To say he only 'survived' against Ali (1), Frazier and Lyle suggests the poster needs to actually see the fights. Bugner was in those fights, particularly the Lyle and Frazier ones.

Bugner's problem, and if you read the reports from the 70's they bear this out, was that he never seemed to give 100%. I'm not sure that it was because Ulric Regis died after his bout with Bugner as much as the fact that Bugner was stopped in his first pro fight and as such always liked to keep a little bit in reserve.
I don't think you can underestimate the effect that having an opponent die can have on you. Especially when you are as young as Bugner was at the time and just at the start of your career. For me Bugner showed simular traits that Eubank later did after the Watson fight... pulling back after hurting his opponent being the main one.
Later on Bugner became even more disenchanted because of the negative media he recieved. In a way Bugners treatment by the British media is simular to how Larry Holmes was treated by the American media... because both men were following such beloved figures and were never really forgiven for that by some sections of the public.
The fact that Bugner was able to run up a good string of wins against the likes of Bey, Page etc when he was touching his 40s in the late 80s seems to be lost on many people. When Bugner went to Austrailia and found himself immensely popular, he actually gave his most impressive performances since the mid and late 70s.... he was actually being talked of as a challenger to Tyson at one point!...
I'm not underestimating the effect of causing the death of a fighter may have had on Bugner. I'm suggesting another reason which you appear to have dismissed out of hand in your usual arrogant style.

If the sole reason Bugner was holding back was because he killed Regis why did he NOT hold back against Dunn and later Winston Allen?

Whats your problem Collins?... what I said wasn't particularly aimed at you mate. Have you got some sort of personality disorder or something???. As for why Bugner didn't hold back against Dunn and Allen, these were two fights in which Bugner was really riled and out to prove something. The Dunn fight was his comeback after a while out and the Allen fight was a very simular situation, with the added spark being provided by Allen butting and cutting Bugner just before Joe laid him out with one punch.
I suggest you avoid my posts in future as they seem to disturb you so much. Go and have a lay down.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 30 Oct 2005, 17:47

mercman wrote:Richard Dunn also riled Bugner by bad mouthing him and ridiculing him in the press which was a bad mistake. Bugner was really angry and flattened him.

Yeah I remember reading about that... the Dunn and Allen fights were just about the only times Bugner was really 'angry' at his opponentand he flattened both of them.

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 30 Oct 2005, 21:03

silkov wrote:
Collins2000 wrote:
silkov wrote: I don't think you can underestimate the effect that having an opponent die can have on you. Especially when you are as young as Bugner was at the time and just at the start of your career. For me Bugner showed simular traits that Eubank later did after the Watson fight... pulling back after hurting his opponent being the main one.
Later on Bugner became even more disenchanted because of the negative media he recieved. In a way Bugners treatment by the British media is simular to how Larry Holmes was treated by the American media... because both men were following such beloved figures and were never really forgiven for that by some sections of the public.
The fact that Bugner was able to run up a good string of wins against the likes of Bey, Page etc when he was touching his 40s in the late 80s seems to be lost on many people. When Bugner went to Austrailia and found himself immensely popular, he actually gave his most impressive performances since the mid and late 70s.... he was actually being talked of as a challenger to Tyson at one point!...
I'm not underestimating the effect of causing the death of a fighter may have had on Bugner. I'm suggesting another reason which you appear to have dismissed out of hand in your usual arrogant style.

If the sole reason Bugner was holding back was because he killed Regis why did he NOT hold back against Dunn and later Winston Allen?

Whats your problem Collins?... what I said wasn't particularly aimed at you mate. Have you got some sort of personality disorder or something???. As for why Bugner didn't hold back against Dunn and Allen, these were two fights in which Bugner was really riled and out to prove something. The Dunn fight was his comeback after a while out and the Allen fight was a very simular situation, with the added spark being provided by Allen butting and cutting Bugner just before Joe laid him out with one punch.
I suggest you avoid my posts in future as they seem to disturb you so much. Go and have a lay down.

But how does this fit in with your theory that Bugner didn't go all out solely because he'd killed a man? I suggest it's a lot less clear cut than you'd have us believe. Still, never mind, you rarely give a coherant answer anyway.

I think I've told you before, Silky, that I find your posts amusing if somewhat shallow. Try and keep a lid on the arrogance though. You have nothing to be arrogant about, mate.

Rory McCloskey · Post by **Rory McCloskey** » 30 Oct 2005, 21:13

brockton blockbuster wrote....

great choice rory!!!!!!!!! the man looked great on film, he bobbed and weaved well, very fast hand speed, and had a devastating right hand that coiuld fell any heavyweight.

haha yeahh i dont know much on brits, but i thought id throw him in there.. i mean why not? at least he was a champ.

which fight do u have on tape? ive been dieing to find some

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 31 Oct 2005, 06:43

Collins2000 wrote:
silkov wrote:
Collins2000 wrote: I'm not underestimating the effect of causing the death of a fighter may have had on Bugner. I'm suggesting another reason which you appear to have dismissed out of hand in your usual arrogant style.

If the sole reason Bugner was holding back was because he killed Regis why did he NOT hold back against Dunn and later Winston Allen?

Whats your problem Collins?... what I said wasn't particularly aimed at you mate. Have you got some sort of personality disorder or something???. As for why Bugner didn't hold back against Dunn and Allen, these were two fights in which Bugner was really riled and out to prove something. The Dunn fight was his comeback after a while out and the Allen fight was a very simular situation, with the added spark being provided by Allen butting and cutting Bugner just before Joe laid him out with one punch.
I suggest you avoid my posts in future as they seem to disturb you so much. Go and have a lay down.
But how does this fit in with your theory that Bugner didn't go all out solely because he'd killed a man? I suggest it's a lot less clear cut than you'd have us believe. Still, never mind, you rarely give a coherant answer anyway.

I think I've told you before, Silky, that I find your posts amusing if somewhat shallow. Try and keep a lid on the arrogance though. You have nothing to be arrogant about, mate.

Figure it out for yourself mate, I'm through trying to have any semblance of a reasonable debate with you. I really don't give a toss what you think but I suppose I should be flattered that you see fit to stalk me around the forums and study my posts like you do, I am however a married man, and I think you should channel your energies elsewhere as you're really starting to embarrass yourself!...... 8)

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 31 Oct 2005, 15:02

silkov wrote:
Collins2000 wrote:
silkov wrote: Whats your problem Collins?... what I said wasn't particularly aimed at you mate. Have you got some sort of personality disorder or something???. As for why Bugner didn't hold back against Dunn and Allen, these were two fights in which Bugner was really riled and out to prove something. The Dunn fight was his comeback after a while out and the Allen fight was a very simular situation, with the added spark being provided by Allen butting and cutting Bugner just before Joe laid him out with one punch.
I suggest you avoid my posts in future as they seem to disturb you so much. Go and have a lay down.
But how does this fit in with your theory that Bugner didn't go all out solely because he'd killed a man? I suggest it's a lot less clear cut than you'd have us believe. Still, never mind, you rarely give a coherant answer anyway.

I think I've told you before, Silky, that I find your posts amusing if somewhat shallow. Try and keep a lid on the arrogance though. You have nothing to be arrogant about, mate.

Figure it out for yourself mate, I'm through trying to have any semblance of a reasonable debate with you. I really don't give a toss what you think but I suppose I should be flattered that you see fit to stalk me around the forums and study my posts like you do, I am however a married man, and I think you should channel your energies elsewhere as you're really starting to embarrass yourself!...... 8)

Never mind the feeble attempts at abusive humour, Silky. Why not answer the question? Come on, mate. You've never been shy of trying to ram your opinions down people's throats before...

Rory McCloskey · Post by **Rory McCloskey** » 31 Oct 2005, 19:11

what about jerry quarry.. i beleive he was british ney?

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 31 Oct 2005, 20:55

Rory McCloskey wrote:what about jerry quarry.. i beleive he was british ney?

Quarry had Irish ancestry.... 8)

Rory McCloskey · Post by **Rory McCloskey** » 01 Nov 2005, 00:30

close enough laddy's

HeavyHitters · Post by **HeavyHitters** » 01 Nov 2005, 13:21

Isn't Lewis moving to Las Vegas, and getting ready for a comeback?!

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 04 Nov 2005, 05:16

You really need an attitude transplant Brockton... you seem to find any view that conflicts with yours to be 'laughable'.
And this from someone who rates Herbie Hide amongst the top ten British heavyweights of all time!!!.
Have you ACTUALLY seen Bugners fights with Ali, Frazier and LYLE???.... ??? he didn't just survive, these were competitive fights... I know I have seen them, and doubt that you have. If you have and you really belive what you say then your knowledge of boxing needs to expand quite a bit. You don't really know what you're seeing. Have you seen the Cooper fight??.... it was a close decision but Bugner deserved it and remember while Henry was 37 he was still a very tough and capable fighter while Bugner was barely 21.
Do you honestly think that someone who was koed by Rahman and Mccall could go the distance with Frazier???. Now thats laughable!. Lewis was even scared to death against a doped up Tyson.
And Bugner never fought Foreman.
I find your views on Bugner a joke

woa woa slow down there slugger. no need to get all rude

- and yes i have seen plenty of bugner and lewis fights

you seem to find any view that conflicts with yours to be 'laughable'.

and when was this??? o yeah i think i did once when people were saying vitali would whip joe frazier

im sry but IMO lennox lewis was in a class above bugner. i rate lennox 11th all time, i dont rate bugner in my top 50. i saw bugner vs ali II, it waas a dull lackluster preformance from both men and bugner was just in survival mode from a old shot ali who a prime lennox lewis would have beaten. NOT A PRIME ALI. bugner got off the floor to give joe a tough fight, but at this time joe was washed up and was never really the same after ali I let alone the foreman beating.

harp on lewis losses to mccall and rahman, what about bugners losses to larry middleton and jack bodell???

- bugner gave lyle a close fight but lyle was starting to age at 36 and had already been through wars (ali, foreman) and was coming off a bad loss to jimmy young.

- cooper won the fight vs bugner, it was close. but coopers best days were behind him and he wa 37 and he did have some left, but not the same as 7 years ago.

bugner defintley a good contender and is somewhat underated, but i feel its overating to put him in the same class as lenox lewis. lenox was arguebally a top 10 heavy of all time.

- lewis was better than lyle, bigger, stronger, hit harder, just as good boxing skills.

- i cant see bugner beating lewis, if he couldnt beat a shot older ali

- and now that i have given it more thought, i do agree i made a mistake of putting hide ovver bugner. i obviosously was not thinking clear enough and messsed up. bugner would have defintley beat hide. but no need to get carried away and make bugner out to be a all time great

J · Post by J » 04 Nov 2005, 05:55

WELL SAID, im not being funny here but silkov do you have a joe bugner fetsish bro?

we know you dont like lewis but to rate Bugner over lewis is just foolhardy mate. Sorry you are talking two different classes of fighter.

Secondly are you ok? You seem to be deriding people for using language such as laughable in one post then dismiss someones opinion as "ridiculous" in the next post.

Sorry bro you cant have one rule for yourself and one for someone else.

i do add this is just observation I have no interest in getting involved in whatever argument you have with Collins et al but it is becoming somewhat tiresome trolling through page after page.

I know Im as guilty as many but this has been going on for weeks now.

and ill keep out of it now just my four penneth. no offence to anyone.

WildWaylon · Post by **WildWaylon** » 04 Nov 2005, 10:00

I absolutely agree and go along with the comments made by Silkov - Bugner would have been so much better if that unfortunate death hadnt happened - He never fully comitted after that and we all knew he had better to offer but was afraid to really let fly with his potentially lethal punches - He was frustrating and at times boring but if it had happened to me I think I might only be interested in points wins - Has to be considered one of our best without a doubt - Very difficult to make a top ten list but I think Lewis or Farr should take the top spot - In a poll to find the top ten footballers of all time Duncan Edwards name was put forward - He probably deserved to be in it but most people cant remember him playing and can only try to judge from limited film footage - As somebody pointed out this is the problem we have with the boxers of long ago - Thats why I would be reluctant to make a list.

10 british heavyweights of all time

Lewis!?