Frank Bruno versus George Foreman
Posted: 21 Jul 2023, 19:01
1989- 12 rounds.
I can totally see it playing out that way. I also don't think it'd be out of the question for Foreman to KO Bruno. Foreman KO'ing anybody is never out of the question of course.HomicideHenry wrote: ↑22 Jul 2023, 00:17 Foreman in 1989 was still seen as something of a novelty act, and Bruno was trying to rebuild after losing to Mike Tyson. I think it'd of been a great fight. Both men blasting each other, with moments where both seem to be rocking and reeling. Somehow, though, I think I goes the distance.
Foreman's cross-arm defense was great until Holyfield, but the issue was he couldn't unload power punches fast enough from that stance. He abandoned it after Holyfield. In 1989 it was in full use. Bruno could've capitalized off of that. Though not well known for his boxing and movement, Bruno certainly could box and move around as evident in the McCall fight.
Either Foreman wins a narrow decision after scoring a knockdown at some point, or Bruno wins a majority decision after a few anxious rounds where Bruno looked in trouble.
I never understood that cross arm defence. I think there’s a reason you hardly ever see it.HomicideHenry wrote: ↑22 Jul 2023, 00:17 Foreman in 1989 was still seen as something of a novelty act, and Bruno was trying to rebuild after losing to Mike Tyson. I think it'd of been a great fight. Both men blasting each other, with moments where both seem to be rocking and reeling. Somehow, though, I think I goes the distance.
Foreman's cross-arm defense was great until Holyfield, but the issue was he couldn't unload power punches fast enough from that stance. He abandoned it after Holyfield. In 1989 it was in full use. Bruno could've capitalized off of that. Though not well known for his boxing and movement, Bruno certainly could box and move around as evident in the McCall fight.
Either Foreman wins a narrow decision after scoring a knockdown at some point, or Bruno wins a majority decision after a few anxious rounds where Bruno looked in trouble.
You either have to be really powerful, really fast, really tough or really intelligent to pull it off. Fullmer was really tough; then again he used a reverse cross guard that made him all the more awkward. Moore was really intelligent. Norton was quick. Foreman was strong. It's great for defense, but really sucks offensively.Noxy wrote: ↑22 Jul 2023, 09:12I never understood that cross arm defence. I think there’s a reason you hardly ever see it.HomicideHenry wrote: ↑22 Jul 2023, 00:17 Foreman in 1989 was still seen as something of a novelty act, and Bruno was trying to rebuild after losing to Mike Tyson. I think it'd of been a great fight. Both men blasting each other, with moments where both seem to be rocking and reeling. Somehow, though, I think I goes the distance.
Foreman's cross-arm defense was great until Holyfield, but the issue was he couldn't unload power punches fast enough from that stance. He abandoned it after Holyfield. In 1989 it was in full use. Bruno could've capitalized off of that. Though not well known for his boxing and movement, Bruno certainly could box and move around as evident in the McCall fight.
Either Foreman wins a narrow decision after scoring a knockdown at some point, or Bruno wins a majority decision after a few anxious rounds where Bruno looked in trouble.