Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Posted: 28 May 2020, 14:25
by evrenb
I Have been watching lots of FranBruno fights recently. He was big news in the early days and throughout his career. How does he compare to Joshua's rise? I think AJ faced better opposition early on in his fight numbers where Bruno was brought along in the more old fashioned way (Though never fought for British Title). His European title win was good and he had decent wins over LeDoux, Coetzee, Tillis (when he was still decent)as well as Eklund. His fight with Cummings was always going to be a Litmus test and showed Frank's courage.
I think they are matched with Power, Bruno had a better Jab. Joshua better all round boxing skills and better speed. They both reacted similarly when hurt. Stamina could be an issue for both also. Physique; well both matched with amazing physiques.
I know a lot of todays fans overlook Frank but he was a decent fighter and such a popular fighter. ..
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Posted: 28 May 2020, 18:16
by Thomastearns
Frank Bruno had a work ethic and dedication second to none.
He was the model boxer any trainer could want.
Unfortunately Frank's trainer was Terry Lawless.
Nothing against Terry, but in those days the gap between British and US trainers was immense. Absolutely huge.
It's telling of the shambles that was British boxing that Chris Finnegan's middleweight Olympic gold in 68 was the only one won in any division between 1956 and 2000.
Once Brendan Ingle and others finally upped the ante and the British boxers learned to move the results began to follow and a golden age for British boxing was ushered in.
If Frank Bruno was beginning his career now I'd daresay he'd soon be no 1 heavyweight in the world. One of the unrecognised hardest punchers the division has ever seen.
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Posted: 28 May 2020, 18:49
by evrenb
Thomastearns wrote: ↑28 May 2020, 18:16
Frank Bruno had a work ethic and dedication second to none.
He was the model boxer any trainer could want.
Unfortunately Frank's trainer was Terry Lawless.
Nothing against Terry, but in those days the gap between British and US trainers was immense. Absolutely huge.
It's telling of the shambles that was British boxing that Chris Finnegan's middleweight Olympic gold in 68 was the only one won in any division between 1956 and 2000.
Once Brendan Ingle and others finally upped the ante and the British boxers learned to move the results began to follow and a golden age for British boxing was ushered in.
If Frank Bruno was beginning his career now I'd daresay he'd soon be no 1 heavyweight in the world. One of the unrecognised hardest punchers the division has ever seen.
That's a really interesting take on things. I've never considered that. Today he would have changed trainers after losing to bonecrusher no doubt.
I wonder what Frank thinks about his trainer. Didnt George Francis do most of his training??
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Posted: 28 May 2020, 22:43
by Loki
evrenb wrote: ↑28 May 2020, 14:25
I Have been watching lots of FranBruno fights recently. He was big news in the early days and throughout his career. How does he compare to Joshua's rise? I think AJ faced better opposition early on in his fight numbers where Bruno was brought along in the more old fashioned way (Though never fought for British Title). His European title win was good and he had decent wins over LeDoux, Coetzee, Tillis (when he was still decent)as well as Eklund. His fight with Cummings was always going to be a Litmus test and showed Frank's courage.
I think they are matched with Power, Bruno had a better Jab. Joshua better all round boxing skills and better speed. They both reacted similarly when hurt. Stamina could be an issue for both also. Physique; well both matched with amazing physiques.
I know a lot of todays fans overlook Frank but he was a decent fighter and such a popular fighter. ..
Loved Bruno; great guy and is a legend. But, AJ is and will be far superior in virtually all departments.
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Posted: 29 May 2020, 03:24
by bigjack
Bruno was hugely protected,after Witherspoon he somehow managed to get 3 more attempts at the title despite meeting a string of either no hopers or well past their prime names,he never learned how to grab and hold when hurt,had poor stamina and was also dirty,he did have an excellent jab and very good right hand though but poor infighter.Joshua is a better fighter all round and has fought and beaten much better opponents then Bruno ever did,either on the way up or when he won the title.
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Thomastearns wrote: ↑28 May 2020, 18:16
If Frank Bruno was beginning his career now I'd daresay he'd soon be no 1 heavyweight in the world. One of the unrecognised hardest punchers the division has ever seen.
Lol honestly.... no stamina, dodgy chin, great power worked only against lowly opposition. Bruno top 10 no more. It’s a travesty that bum can be considered a world heavyweight champion barely beating a drug addled champ who didn’t train properly and had a virtual breakdown on the way to the ring. Francesco Damiani is more legit of a world heavy champ
Yeah but he beat Joe Bugner? (autocorrect changed Bugner to Butt hurt lol)
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Posted: 29 May 2020, 06:29
by evrenb
In seriousness though I feel a lot of Bruno's challenges were mental..I.e confidence....I think that affected his stamina and also why he fouled a lot. I think ability wise he was good ...his down sides were his stamina as said , hand and footspeed..joshuas chin was no better...power equal...jab Bruno...Joshua stamina not the best either.
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Posted: 29 May 2020, 07:38
by Thomastearns
evrenb wrote: ↑29 May 2020, 06:29
In seriousness though I feel a lot of Bruno's challenges were mental..I.e confidence....I think that affected his stamina and also why he fouled a lot. I think ability wise he was good ...his down sides were his stamina as said , hand and footspeed..joshuas chin was no better...power equal...jab Bruno...Joshua stamina not the best either.
Agreed, Frank Bruno is definitely a confidence fighter, and like the rest of us had his fair share of issues.
I wasn't the only one to notice that whilst he was able to despatch some first rate white boxers with ease he always seemed a little uncertain when facing black fighters from the US. This might not entirely be down to his static ring movement.
The Americans certainly respected him, but they also noticed his somewhat robotic technique.
Those who followed his career could almost sense the reticence and inhibition he fought against time and time again. Those defeats against Bonecrusher and Terrible Tim highlighted so many unnecessary flaws.
Frank being loyal Frank probably never considered the option of him changing trainers as readily as others such as Lewis did.
That Lennox did so, is of course to Lewis' credit.
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Posted: 29 May 2020, 16:40
by brilo33
people talk harsh of bruno when i was growing up fought fighters with mud on there shoulders ,just got out the grave, i was a kid when he thought mike tyson, but ive watched it back when i was older, and i thought bruno done alright against mike , yea he was no lenox lewis but who is. i reckon aj v bruno would of been a dubois v joyce in this era a close fight to call , i would go aj better got the medals, think bruno lacked confidence, but maybe it was fear to much . lewis feels fear also but was a soild and huge fighter
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Posted: 29 May 2020, 16:43
by brilo33
Shhhh wrote: ↑29 May 2020, 05:18
Another corona lockdown insane thread. Bruno was never a better prospect than Joshua in fact you’d be hard pushed for find any better heavyweight prospect than Joshua especially in the U.K.
tyson fury
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Skill wise yes. But he wasn’t an Olympic gold medalist and had some dodgy early fights. He’ll beat Joshua though
dubious, joyce look soiled enough .see i cant tell if this is a slagging off bruno or aj convo now, like i wrote below i think bruno was a good boxer, but he fought scared i mean aj has never faced a mike tyson in his prime
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
evrenb wrote: ↑29 May 2020, 06:29
In seriousness though I feel a lot of Bruno's challenges were mental..I.e confidence....I think that affected his stamina and also why he fouled a lot. I think ability wise he was good ...his down sides were his stamina as said , hand and footspeed..joshuas chin was no better...power equal...jab Bruno...Joshua stamina not the best either.
Yes I agree with the mental part - but that’s a massive part of the boxing game. Many talented athletes in all sport fall short because of the mental part. Holyfield is the best example of a man who’s mental strength made him the achiever he was (well that and HGH LOL ). If Mike Tyson has the mental dedication of Holyfield and his mental strength imagine.... all the super athletes in any sport have that almost superhuman mental quality. I always preferred the flawed ones personally though, they make for more interesting characters..... Joshua is also a manufactured athlete - no boxer has had his level of scientific training, not to mention alleged TUES and PEDS. This lifts him way above Bruno. Joshua beats bruno 8 or 9 times out of 10 imho.
Impressively perceptive. Thanks.
Now it's easy to see that it's an unfair comparison. Bruno may have been a better initial prospect but their lives followed totally different trajectories.
I was getting confused with far too many 'ifs'.
Life isn't like that.
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Agreed, Frank Bruno is definitely a confidence fighter, and like the rest of us had his fair share of issues.
I wasn't the only one to notice that whilst he was able to despatch some first rate white boxers with ease he always seemed a little uncertain when facing black fighters from the US. This might not entirely be down to his static ring movement.
The Americans certainly respected him, but they also noticed his somewhat robotic technique.
Those who followed his career could almost sense the reticence and inhibition he fought against time and time again. Those defeats against Bonecrusher and Terrible Tim highlighted so many unnecessary flaws.
Frank being loyal Frank probably never considered the option of him changing trainers as readily as others such as Lewis did.
That Lennox did so, is of course to Lewis' credit.
I don’t think it’s a white issue, he only faced one half decent white fighter near his prime. Coetzer - who was face first and made for him. Bugner, Rodriguez, LeDoux, Coetzee etc were way past their prime or not that good anyway. Eklund was an accident waiting to happen. Coetzee was on holiday. He bashed plenty of black ‘names’ but they were past their prime and unfit as well - Tillis, Gross, Ferguson, Marin, Ribalta. Floyd Cummings almost kod him and had no boxing skills. At the time most good heavies were black Americans anyway and he tried hard against them he just wasn’t good enough. Most of the half decent fighters he faced were way past their prime, black or white - his matchmaking was some of the best ever until it was time to step up.
Coetzee was on holiday lmfao
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Posted: 29 May 2020, 20:53
by brilo33
Thomastearns wrote: ↑28 May 2020, 18:16
Frank Bruno had a work ethic and dedication second to none.
He was the model boxer any trainer could want.
Unfortunately Frank's trainer was Terry Lawless.
Nothing against Terry, but in those days the gap between British and US trainers was immense. Absolutely huge.
It's telling of the shambles that was British boxing that Chris Finnegan's middleweight Olympic gold in 68 was the only one won in any division between 1956 and 2000.
Once Brendan Ingle and others finally upped the ante and the British boxers learned to move the results began to follow and a golden age for British boxing was ushered in.
If Frank Bruno was beginning his career now I'd daresay he'd soon be no 1 heavyweight in the world. One of the unrecognised hardest punchers the division has ever seen.
i think that is a really good point aswell. i think a lot more british irish boxers should go to america and train under different coaches ,if your a good fighter looking to push on to the top ten you shouldnt settle for one coach
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Posted: 03 Jun 2020, 03:33
by GPTM1403
From memory of the time (which may be false), Bruno was a big prospect then because there was a lack of genuine big heavyweights in this country that could be marketed as well as him and had the tools to compete at higher levels. I also think there was a big element of let's see how far this can go rather than genuine world champion expectations - especially because what he did have put him significantly ahead of the more domestic/continental level of the time. But I can't see Bruno getting near an Olympic medal even with the hype/help it being in London gave Joshua. Bruno had the power to take out anyone and didn't have as poor a chin as most think, (you don't take punch after punch after punch against Tyson or Smith and stay upright with a dodgy chin). But he didn't have the speed/fluidity/stamina to deliver the KO blows at the very top level. Whereas I think Joshua has always been seen as having enough range to deliver them at the current top level, certainly more so than Bruno,(much as the first Ruiz fight showed the difference between Joshua and a real natural boxer).
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Posted: 03 Jun 2020, 12:13
by bigjack
GPTM1403 wrote: ↑03 Jun 2020, 03:33
From memory of the time (which may be false), Bruno was a big prospect then because there was a lack of genuine big heavyweights in this country that could be marketed as well as him and had the tools to compete at higher levels. I also think there was a big element of let's see how far this can go rather than genuine world champion expectations - especially because what he did have put him significantly ahead of the more domestic/continental level of the time. But I can't see Bruno getting near an Olympic medal even with the hype/help it being in London gave Joshua. Bruno had the power to take out anyone and didn't have as poor a chin as most think, (you don't take punch after punch after punch against Tyson or Smith and stay upright with a dodgy chin). But he didn't have the speed/fluidity/stamina to deliver the KO blows at the very top level. Whereas I think Joshua has always been seen as having enough range to deliver them at the current top level, certainly more so than Bruno,(much as the first Ruiz fight showed the difference between Joshua and a real natural boxer).
Bruno did have a decent chin,he just didn't know what to do when tagged,then it was as good as over in most cases.
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Posted: 05 Jun 2020, 09:01
by GPTM1403
bigjack wrote: ↑03 Jun 2020, 12:13
Bruno did have a decent chin,he just didn't know what to do when tagged,then it was as good as over in most cases.
exactly
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Posted: 05 Jun 2020, 10:30
by Enlightened-One
evrenb wrote: ↑28 May 2020, 14:25Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
No.
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
Posted: 05 Jun 2020, 10:40
by jamesmcdonnell
It woulnd't have mattered if Bruno had Eddie Futch, Whitey Bimstein, and Manny Steward in his corner, he had no survivial skills, and the turning circle of an oil tanker.
That is all.
Re: Was Frank Bruno a better prospect than Anthony Joshua?
(autocorrect changed Bugner to Butt hurt lol)