BoxRec

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:

stujones wrote:Here is a few questions.

1) Do you think it was Bruno's eye injury that resulted in him being so intimidated in fight 2 vs Tyson? One thing I cannot understand is how Bruno was so intimitated second time round. He had gotton more experienced, and Tyson looked rusty as anything vs Mathis Jnr. He did well in the first fight and looked to have an even better chance in match 2? Why did he get so intimitated?

I think the people who argue that Bruno is underated do tend to look at his arm crossing prior to the fight as some excuse... Almost like, forget the Tyson rematch as he was intimitated. You really cannot think like that when it goes to comparing him with others.

2) Do you think that had Tyson had a better prep for fight 1 and was more active that the first fight would have resembled the rematch more? As there is such a difference in the rematch, yet Tyson was definately not the fighter he was in 1996 and Bruno was (supposed to at least) be better in 1996. Do you think Tyson took Bruno lightly in match 1, and because he was hurt in the match, trained like the buggery for the rematch?

I think Bruno fell for all the gangster image and the Tysons 'unbeatable' myth was around at that time (the Douglas loss was seen as a fluke) - add the to the fact Tyson had already beat him silly to add to the demons. The eye problem may have added too it all.

I remember Bruno saying if Tysons heavies tried pushing him around he'd knock them out - meaning they were probably intimidating him.

I think the only reason Tyson had an easier time was because Frank was intimidated, whereas in the first fight he was gunning for Tyson.

I think Bruno was worried about the eye and being blinded. He went ahead with the fight because he wanted to defend his title and also have that last payday... but he was lucky that the eye wasn't completely ruined in the fight.

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
Lennoxs jab wasn't particularly great - Brunos was better and more natural. Lennox had great uppercuts and straights but the only reason the jab worked was because of his reach not his ability to throw the punch.

Ruiz is very poor and the reason he beat Johnson was because of acting, many thought he lost to Golota, wasn't Rahman terribly overweight? We all know what happened againt Tua, Jones and Toney.

Vitali is very overated - he was protected for a long time and all his good wins came against old fat men. Would be an interesting fight because neither Bruno or Vitali were usually outboxed. I'll never foget seeing Vitali sprinting ungainly backwards after been tagged by Sanders - if anyone figures out all they need to do is follow up the first punch with combinations Vitali will be done because leaning back won't escape a forward onslaught of combinations.

You couldn't discount the chance of Bruno ko'ing Brewster although if it did go late Brewster would probably finnish him - although a UD is possible. Anyway I think I'll stop debating this as mythical matches are, well mythical.

I would have liked to have seen Bruno-Holyfield - I think he could have given Holy some serious problems.

I'll stop these mythical matches but will discuss some of the fights that did happen.

Rahman overweight vs Ruiz? A little but not terrible, he was a stone heavier in the Tua Rematch. He was about 7 lbs heavier than in his best performances. He was the same weight as he was for his Corrie Sanders win.

Beat Johnson cause of acting? Nah, he was winning the fight conclusively on Jim Watt's cards - and would have been ahead without the point deductions. He nearly stopped Johnson a round prior to the DQ and I think the DQ prevented a KO.

Golota vs Ruiz was close no doubt, but people were almost calling it a forgone conclusion before the fight. Saying the only person who could lose it was Golota by choking. He didn't choke and no doubt it was close (even if you scored it for Andrew) it was Ruiz' holding and inside work that discouraged Golota. Nobody thought he would manage that vs the bigger man.

Your right about Vitali, he is still a little unproven and I don't think is a good as people say. However, Sanders is a different fighter than Bruno - Sanders has better leg speed, better handspeed and I would say better raw power than Big Frank. Sanders had some good natural raw ability, when Vitali takes on slower men - like an 18 stone, 39 year old Lewis, like a huge slow Danny Williams - he finds it much more comfortable. Now, Bruno was quicker than them two but not quick enough IMO.

Bruno vs Holyfield? I cannot think of a single aspect of Bruno's game that he was better than a prime Bowe and although Bowe got the better of their series - he was in a hell of a fight all of the time, Holyfield beats Bruno 10 times out of 10.

I don't want to sound disrespectful to Bruno, in many way he is a hero of mine. He made the most of what I would say was limited natural skills. He turned his life around from a tearaway teenager and trained like the buggery to achieve his dream. He did manage to achieve it fairly and squarley. He is what really boxing is all about, when we do lists of fighters who over-achieved compared to their natural talent (i.e. the opposite of Kirklaind laing) he would be the first person I list.

stujones wrote:

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
Lennoxs jab wasn't particularly great - Brunos was better and more natural. Lennox had great uppercuts and straights but the only reason the jab worked was because of his reach not his ability to throw the punch.

Ruiz is very poor and the reason he beat Johnson was because of acting, many thought he lost to Golota, wasn't Rahman terribly overweight? We all know what happened againt Tua, Jones and Toney.

Vitali is very overated - he was protected for a long time and all his good wins came against old fat men. Would be an interesting fight because neither Bruno or Vitali were usually outboxed. I'll never foget seeing Vitali sprinting ungainly backwards after been tagged by Sanders - if anyone figures out all they need to do is follow up the first punch with combinations Vitali will be done because leaning back won't escape a forward onslaught of combinations.

You couldn't discount the chance of Bruno ko'ing Brewster although if it did go late Brewster would probably finnish him - although a UD is possible. Anyway I think I'll stop debating this as mythical matches are, well mythical.

I would have liked to have seen Bruno-Holyfield - I think he could have given Holy some serious problems.

I'll stop these mythical matches but will discuss some of the fights that did happen.

Rahman overweight vs Ruiz? A little but not terrible, he was a stone heavier in the Tua Rematch. He was about 7 lbs heavier than in his best performances. He was the same weight as he was for his Corrie Sanders win.

Beat Johnson cause of acting? Nah, he was winning the fight conclusively on Jim Watt's cards - and would have been ahead without the point deductions. He nearly stopped Johnson a round prior to the DQ and I think the DQ prevented a KO.

Golota vs Ruiz was close no doubt, but people were almost calling it a forgone conclusion before the fight. Saying the only person who could lose it was Golota by choking. He didn't choke and no doubt it was close (even if you scored it for Andrew) it was Ruiz' holding and inside work that discouraged Golota. Nobody thought he would manage that vs the bigger man.

Your right about Vitali, he is still a little unproven and I don't think is a good as people say. However, Sanders is a different fighter than Bruno - Sanders has better leg speed, better handspeed and I would say better raw power than Big Frank. Sanders had some good natural raw ability, when Vitali takes on slower men - like an 18 stone, 39 year old Lewis, like a huge slow Danny Williams - he finds it much more comfortable. Now, Bruno was quicker than them two but not quick enough IMO.

Bruno vs Holyfield? I cannot think of a single aspect of Bruno's game that he was better than a prime Bowe and although Bowe got the better of their series - he was in a hell of a fight all of the time, Holyfield beats Bruno 10 times out of 10.

I don't want to sound disrespectful to Bruno, in many way he is a hero of mine. He made the most of what I would say was limited natural skills. He turned his life around from a tearaway teenager and trained like the buggery to achieve his dream. He did manage to achieve it fairly and squarley. He is what really boxing is all about, when we do lists of fighters who over-achieved compared to their natural talent (i.e. the opposite of Kirklaind laing) he would be the first person I list.

I think Brunos power would have bothered a lot of other heavyweight champs. Holifield would be a big favourite against Frank but I think Bruno could have made a good fight of his and would have hurt Holifield before perhaps running out of steam. I think Bruno could well punch too hard for Vitali... his jab would give Vitali problems as it would have Holifield.
Brunos main problem was his lack of belief in himself and this nervous tension is what caused or contributed to his stamina problem and most of his defeats. In his defeats it is only in his fights with Tyson that he was 'outclassed' in all his other defeats against Smith, Witherspoon and Lewis he was ahead when he was beaten.

silkov wrote:

Collins2000 wrote:

silkov wrote: Tyson destroyed quite a few fighters not just Bruno and its worth remembering that Frank finished on his feet against Tyson... not unconcious. Also you should know that Bruno went into the second Tyson fight with a detached retina... so that makes his performance rather better than it may look at first glance.

On his feet or not, he was f*cking hammered.

Keep the excuses coming, Silkov. I'm sure you will convince us soon that Bruno is up there with the all time greats.

Not excuses, but facts mate!... Bruno did much better against Tyson than many of Tysons other opponents. Try watching the fights........

He did much better in the rematch than many of Tyson's other opponents???? Actually, he 'fought' like a frightened rabbit and got f*cking hammered. For revisionists like yourself this might constitute a great effort. Unfortunately for anyone who saw it, it was a one-sided arsekicking of a bloke who looked terrified.

You crack me up, Silkov.

silkov wrote:

stujones wrote:Here is a few questions.

1) Do you think it was Bruno's eye injury that resulted in him being so intimidated in fight 2 vs Tyson? One thing I cannot understand is how Bruno was so intimitated second time round. He had gotton more experienced, and Tyson looked rusty as anything vs Mathis Jnr. He did well in the first fight and looked to have an even better chance in match 2? Why did he get so intimitated?

I think the people who argue that Bruno is underated do tend to look at his arm crossing prior to the fight as some excuse... Almost like, forget the Tyson rematch as he was intimitated. You really cannot think like that when it goes to comparing him with others.

2) Do you think that had Tyson had a better prep for fight 1 and was more active that the first fight would have resembled the rematch more? As there is such a difference in the rematch, yet Tyson was definately not the fighter he was in 1996 and Bruno was (supposed to at least) be better in 1996. Do you think Tyson took Bruno lightly in match 1, and because he was hurt in the match, trained like the buggery for the rematch?

The thing is that Bruno knew he shouldn't have been fighting anyone in the 2nd Tyson fight because of his eye injury. He only just got past the prefight medical. Also, people go on about the arm crossing, but the fact is that when Bruno got in the ring he took a licking and didn't look for the canvas... it was a very brave performance.
I think Tyson was probably almost as good as ever at that point. Technically he'd stopped doing some of the things he'd done with Rooney but the power and strength was still there.
It was the first Holifield loss that really broke Tyson, he was never the same after that.

Can you elaborate on this statement "He only just got past the prefight medical. "

Or did you just throw it in for effect?

Keep the excuses coming Silkov. I can feel myself starting to hallucinate and have visions of Big Frank beating the crap out of all the 70's heavyweights. Do you have visions like this, mate?

Collins2000 wrote:

silkov wrote:

Collins2000 wrote: On his feet or not, he was f*cking hammered.

Keep the excuses coming, Silkov. I'm sure you will convince us soon that Bruno is up there with the all time greats.

Not excuses, but facts mate!... Bruno did much better against Tyson than many of Tysons other opponents. Try watching the fights........

He did much better in the rematch than many of Tyson's other opponents???? Actually, he 'fought' like a frightened rabbit and got f*cking hammered. For revisionists like yourself this might constitute a great effort. Unfortunately for anyone who saw it, it was a one-sided arsekicking of a bloke who looked terrified.

You crack me up, Silkov.

Grow up mate, you're getting sadder by the day....

Crikey has someone reinvented Frank Bruno while I was sleeping.

This is the guy who was virtually splattered by Jumbo Cummings, who feasted on retired lumps like Bugner and who did next to nothing to 'earn' his endless shots at the title.

A fighter who, had McCall been given another round, would never have won the title. A fighter who always capitulated the first time he was hit, and owned zero survival instincts.

He had a good jab, and thundering right, but he was predictable, mechanical, slow and was a sucker once hit. He had heart, determination and power but to suggest out of hand he destroys the leading contenders of ttoday is a little flippant in my opinion. And plenty here are guilty of painting a romanticised version of him.

BoneCrusher Smith destroyed him, Witherspoon clubbed him down, Tyson overwhelmed him and Lewis got past the jab and took him apart.

I like Bruno, and cheered like hell when he won the title, I didn't cheer so much when it was reported he beat his wife. Nor did I cheer when I PPV Tyson II.

But he's an icon and he he would have been competitive in today's division. I'd say he probably pitches somewhere between Rahman and McCline in today's picture.

Now i remember why i should never get into who would have beat who arguments.

topper123 wrote:Now i remember why i should never get into who would have beat who arguments.

Debate is good man. Its why we're here.

Most of todays Heavyweights would beat Bruno - Tua, Peter & Brewster would knock him out easily. Vitali, Wladamir & Toney would give him a beating. Byrd would outbox him. In fact, I don't think Bruno would beat any of todays heavyweights.

DavidPayne wrote:Debate is good man. Its why we're here.

yeah i know, but the thing with who would have beat who, is that its pointless because we'll never know.

Still say Bruno would have beat Ruiz though

If your going to say what did Bruno do to earn his title shots why not ask what the other challengers did to earn theres?. Cummings was a very dangerous fighter who also gave Renaldo Snipes a very good fight amongst others. Smith did not destroy Bruno, he stopped him after being jabbed silly for 9 rounds... and this was the man who later would give Holmes a hard fight and prove himself a danger to any of the top men.
To say that Bruno wouldnt beat the majority of heavies out there today is wrong... Bruno would have a chance of beating all of them, the talent of todays division is paltry compared to the fighters who were around in Brunos time.

OK.

Dont get me wrong, Smith was a competent heavyweight and Witherspoon is probably one of the division greatest underachievers.

But some of the criticism of the current crop is unfair, so much of the apathy towards the current heavyweight isn't because they lack abaility but more because they dont actually fight each other often enough and the picture is too fragmented.

World title defences get too easy because there are four champions.

But match ups that pitch Brewster in with Byrd and Rahman in with Vitali are good viewing.

Tell me the top ten heavyweights Bruno has on his resume that you wouldn't back Rahman, Brewster, Peter to beat?

DavidPayne wrote:OK.

Dont get me wrong, Smith was a competent heavyweight and Witherspoon is probably one of the division greatest underachievers.

But some of the criticism of the current crop is unfair, so much of the apathy towards the current heavyweight isn't because they lack abaility but more because they dont actually fight each other often enough and the picture is too fragmented.

World title defences get too easy because there are four champions.

But match ups that pitch Brewster in with Byrd and Rahman in with Vitali are good viewing.

Tell me the top ten heavyweights Bruno has on his resume that you wouldn't back Rahman, Brewster, Peter to beat?

Mccall (who could probably beat most of the top ten heavies today still) Coetzee, Tillis, Ledouxe, Williams, Smith, Cummings, Coetzer, Bugner.
I'd pick all the above to beat the fighters you mentioned.

Rahman is very ordinary with a big O, Brewster even more so and Peter to be honest is a joke.... he has almost no technique what ever and is so slow he makes Bruno seem like Ali in comparison. All these guys, Ruiz and Byrd included would be lucky to get into the top 10 of the division twenty years ago. Or even 10 years ago come to that.

stujones wrote:

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
Lennoxs jab wasn't particularly great - Brunos was better and more natural. Lennox had great uppercuts and straights but the only reason the jab worked was because of his reach not his ability to throw the punch.

Ruiz is very poor and the reason he beat Johnson was because of acting, many thought he lost to Golota, wasn't Rahman terribly overweight? We all know what happened againt Tua, Jones and Toney.

Vitali is very overated - he was protected for a long time and all his good wins came against old fat men. Would be an interesting fight because neither Bruno or Vitali were usually outboxed. I'll never foget seeing Vitali sprinting ungainly backwards after been tagged by Sanders - if anyone figures out all they need to do is follow up the first punch with combinations Vitali will be done because leaning back won't escape a forward onslaught of combinations.

You couldn't discount the chance of Bruno ko'ing Brewster although if it did go late Brewster would probably finnish him - although a UD is possible. Anyway I think I'll stop debating this as mythical matches are, well mythical.

I would have liked to have seen Bruno-Holyfield - I think he could have given Holy some serious problems.

I'll stop these mythical matches but will discuss some of the fights that did happen.

Rahman overweight vs Ruiz? A little but not terrible, he was a stone heavier in the Tua Rematch. He was about 7 lbs heavier than in his best performances. He was the same weight as he was for his Corrie Sanders win.

Beat Johnson cause of acting? Nah, he was winning the fight conclusively on Jim Watt's cards - and would have been ahead without the point deductions. He nearly stopped Johnson a round prior to the DQ and I think the DQ prevented a KO.

Golota vs Ruiz was close no doubt, but people were almost calling it a forgone conclusion before the fight. Saying the only person who could lose it was Golota by choking. He didn't choke and no doubt it was close (even if you scored it for Andrew) it was Ruiz' holding and inside work that discouraged Golota. Nobody thought he would manage that vs the bigger man.

Your right about Vitali, he is still a little unproven and I don't think is a good as people say. However, Sanders is a different fighter than Bruno - Sanders has better leg speed, better handspeed and I would say better raw power than Big Frank. Sanders had some good natural raw ability, when Vitali takes on slower men - like an 18 stone, 39 year old Lewis, like a huge slow Danny Williams - he finds it much more comfortable. Now, Bruno was quicker than them two but not quick enough IMO.

Bruno vs Holyfield? I cannot think of a single aspect of Bruno's game that he was better than a prime Bowe and although Bowe got the better of their series - he was in a hell of a fight all of the time, Holyfield beats Bruno 10 times out of 10.

I don't want to sound disrespectful to Bruno, in many way he is a hero of mine. He made the most of what I would say was limited natural skills. He turned his life around from a tearaway teenager and trained like the buggery to achieve his dream. He did manage to achieve it fairly and squarley. He is what really boxing is all about, when we do lists of fighters who over-achieved compared to their natural talent (i.e. the opposite of Kirklaind laing) he would be the first person I list.

Sanders won 1 and 2 and had Vitali looking scared. He then ran out of steam and lay on ropes for the rest of the fight. If Sanders oculd fight for a few more rounds he would have won. Franks stamina may not be great but he'll fight for 7-8rounds - Vitali looks tired at 8rounds too. I believe Vitali quit against Byrd because he was tired aswell as the shoulder problem.

What you need to remember about Brunos losses is many had Witherspoon beating Holmes - it was close. Smith ko'd Witherspoon in a round and gave Holmes hard fights. Lennox and Tyson were great too. Bruno always lost at a very high level and usually after dominating. If he was taught survival skills he'd have been a champ for longer.

Agreed, it wasn't until the McCall fight that Bruno seemed to learn his lesson and hold on for dear life. I don't think that it would have worked against Witherspoon who was too crafty or Tyson who was too quick for him to just hold on.

Unfortunately for Bruno he wasn't the smartest fighter in the world, he didn't really have the ability to adapt or figure out a winning strategy, which is why in the fights he lost he was often winning handily before getting smashed to bits.

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:

stujones wrote:

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
Lennoxs jab wasn't particularly great - Brunos was better and more natural. Lennox had great uppercuts and straights but the only reason the jab worked was because of his reach not his ability to throw the punch.

Ruiz is very poor and the reason he beat Johnson was because of acting, many thought he lost to Golota, wasn't Rahman terribly overweight? We all know what happened againt Tua, Jones and Toney.

Vitali is very overated - he was protected for a long time and all his good wins came against old fat men. Would be an interesting fight because neither Bruno or Vitali were usually outboxed. I'll never foget seeing Vitali sprinting ungainly backwards after been tagged by Sanders - if anyone figures out all they need to do is follow up the first punch with combinations Vitali will be done because leaning back won't escape a forward onslaught of combinations.

You couldn't discount the chance of Bruno ko'ing Brewster although if it did go late Brewster would probably finnish him - although a UD is possible. Anyway I think I'll stop debating this as mythical matches are, well mythical.

I would have liked to have seen Bruno-Holyfield - I think he could have given Holy some serious problems.

I'll stop these mythical matches but will discuss some of the fights that did happen.

Rahman overweight vs Ruiz? A little but not terrible, he was a stone heavier in the Tua Rematch. He was about 7 lbs heavier than in his best performances. He was the same weight as he was for his Corrie Sanders win.

Beat Johnson cause of acting? Nah, he was winning the fight conclusively on Jim Watt's cards - and would have been ahead without the point deductions. He nearly stopped Johnson a round prior to the DQ and I think the DQ prevented a KO.

Golota vs Ruiz was close no doubt, but people were almost calling it a forgone conclusion before the fight. Saying the only person who could lose it was Golota by choking. He didn't choke and no doubt it was close (even if you scored it for Andrew) it was Ruiz' holding and inside work that discouraged Golota. Nobody thought he would manage that vs the bigger man.

Your right about Vitali, he is still a little unproven and I don't think is a good as people say. However, Sanders is a different fighter than Bruno - Sanders has better leg speed, better handspeed and I would say better raw power than Big Frank. Sanders had some good natural raw ability, when Vitali takes on slower men - like an 18 stone, 39 year old Lewis, like a huge slow Danny Williams - he finds it much more comfortable. Now, Bruno was quicker than them two but not quick enough IMO.

Bruno vs Holyfield? I cannot think of a single aspect of Bruno's game that he was better than a prime Bowe and although Bowe got the better of their series - he was in a hell of a fight all of the time, Holyfield beats Bruno 10 times out of 10.

I don't want to sound disrespectful to Bruno, in many way he is a hero of mine. He made the most of what I would say was limited natural skills. He turned his life around from a tearaway teenager and trained like the buggery to achieve his dream. He did manage to achieve it fairly and squarley. He is what really boxing is all about, when we do lists of fighters who over-achieved compared to their natural talent (i.e. the opposite of Kirklaind laing) he would be the first person I list.

Sanders won 1 and 2 and had Vitali looking scared. He then ran out of steam and lay on ropes for the rest of the fight. If Sanders oculd fight for a few more rounds he would have won. Franks stamina may not be great but he'll fight for 7-8rounds - Vitali looks tired at 8rounds too. I believe Vitali quit against Byrd because he was tired aswell as the shoulder problem.

What you need to remember about Brunos losses is many had Witherspoon beating Holmes - it was close. Smith ko'd Witherspoon in a round and gave Holmes hard fights. Lennox and Tyson were great too. Bruno always lost at a very high level and usually after dominating. If he was taught survival skills he'd have been a champ for longer.

Exactly, I think Bruno would have a very good chance against Vitali.... who would be hit much harder by Bruno than he has been by any of his opponents today (including Lewis). I think Bruno could outlast Vitali as he had a bigger heart but I also can see Bruno coming out and koing Vitali in one or two rounds.

DavidPayne wrote:Crikey has someone reinvented Frank Bruno while I was sleeping.

This is the guy who was virtually splattered by Jumbo Cummings, who feasted on retired lumps like Bugner and who did next to nothing to 'earn' his endless shots at the title.

A fighter who, had McCall been given another round, would never have won the title. A fighter who always capitulated the first time he was hit, and owned zero survival instincts.

He had a good jab, and thundering right, but he was predictable, mechanical, slow and was a sucker once hit. He had heart, determination and power but to suggest out of hand he destroys the leading contenders of ttoday is a little flippant in my opinion. And plenty here are guilty of painting a romanticised version of him.

BoneCrusher Smith destroyed him, Witherspoon clubbed him down, Tyson overwhelmed him and Lewis got past the jab and took him apart.

I like Bruno, and cheered like hell when he won the title, I didn't cheer so much when it was reported he beat his wife. Nor did I cheer when I PPV Tyson II.

But he's an icon and he he would have been competitive in today's division. I'd say he probably pitches somewhere between Rahman and McCline in today's picture.

Dave, all those fights you mention, Bruno was winning before getting busted up. His problem was lack of stamina and lack of ability to adapt to adversity. Tyson overwhelmed just about everyone he fought with notable exceptions. At his peak, the only man who went the distance was Tucker and Bonecrusher.

I'm not saying he would have destroyed everyone in front of him in todays climate. Toney would have hammered him, Byrd would probably have scored a rare late KO, Vitali would have knocked him silly from a distance, Brewster may have taken an early beating to Rally, Ruiz, who knows, he's a survivor after all. What is without doubt is that Frank made the most of what ability he did have, and certainly came in in good enough shape to be competitive.

The best performance of his career was the boxing lesson he gave Lewis before Lewis found the punch to turn it around.

I don't think Vitalie would outbox Bruno... firstly Bruno had a very good jab of his own which would nulify Vitalies jab, but also when Bruno hit him, Vitali would go into his shell and most likely be taken out.
Bruno would be too strong for Ruiz to carry out his punch and grab game with him... he'd dominate Ruiz with the jab and knock him out in about 8 rounds.

All in All we can say that Bruno would give any of the todays heavys trouble, wether he would have beaten all of them we will never know.

What we do know is that he fought to the best of his ability and never let anyone down, the guy probaly had Bi-polar when he was fighting so had to fight alot of other things as well as his opponents.

I just hope it goes well for him from now on.

Topper good summary.

Silkov good reply.

Over and out.

topper123 wrote:All in All we can say that Bruno would give any of the todays heavys trouble, wether he would have beaten all of them we will never know.

What we do know is that he fought to the best of his ability and never let anyone down, the guy probaly had Bi-polar when he was fighting so had to fight alot of other things as well as his opponents.

I just hope it goes well for him from now on.

I felt let down after Bruno-Tyson II. That was PPV if I remember correctly and the guy clearly wasn't in a fit state (of mind) to fight. If you remember the Sky promotional ads for that fight, it was Bruno saying "he can't beat me... no way.... no way.... no way", and then he came out scared shitless so I would be lying if I said I didn't feel let down.

johnswan1 wrote:

topper123 wrote:All in All we can say that Bruno would give any of the todays heavys trouble, wether he would have beaten all of them we will never know.

What we do know is that he fought to the best of his ability and never let anyone down, the guy probaly had Bi-polar when he was fighting so had to fight alot of other things as well as his opponents.

I just hope it goes well for him from now on.

I felt let down after Bruno-Tyson II. That was PPV if I remember correctly and the guy clearly wasn't in a fit state (of mind) to fight. If you remember the Sky promotional ads for that fight, it was Bruno saying "he can't beat me... no way.... no way.... no way", and then he came out scared shitless so I would be lying if I said I didn't feel let down.

Silkov has already explained that it wasn't Bruno's fault. In the parallel universe inhabited by Silkov, Bruno bashes Tyson 9 times out of 10.

Collins2000 wrote:

johnswan1 wrote:

topper123 wrote:All in All we can say that Bruno would give any of the todays heavys trouble, wether he would have beaten all of them we will never know.

What we do know is that he fought to the best of his ability and never let anyone down, the guy probaly had Bi-polar when he was fighting so had to fight alot of other things as well as his opponents.

I just hope it goes well for him from now on.

I felt let down after Bruno-Tyson II. That was PPV if I remember correctly and the guy clearly wasn't in a fit state (of mind) to fight. If you remember the Sky promotional ads for that fight, it was Bruno saying "he can't beat me... no way.... no way.... no way", and then he came out scared shitless so I would be lying if I said I didn't feel let down.

Silkov has already explained that it wasn't Bruno's fault. In the parallel universe inhabited by Silkov, Bruno bashes Tyson 9 times out of 10.

Which part of 'detatched retina' don't you understand?. You're the sort of prat who probably needs a plaster when you cut yourself shaving.
Now run along and play with Klomp....