Michael Moorer vs. Frank Bruno in '93

This simp has Bruno and McCall both rated among the greatest punchers in history^

No joke

 

Bruno was an extremely hard puncher. McCall was well above average. Bet you can't find a thread that backs up your bullshit. You just have really poor reading comprehension and that's more likely what is going on.

 

great, now mikE is agreeing with me.

 

http://fightbeat.com/forums/showthr...eights&p=1323158&highlight=McCall#post1323158

Post #42, you dumb cunt

Anybody who thinks Frank Bruno or Oliver McCall punched anywhere near as hard as those other three guys doesn't know jack shit about boxing... Maybe if you actually watched fights instead of just reading through Win-Loss records, you wouldn't say such stupid shit all the time

 

mikE really is the worst. Trying to sell McCall and Bruno among the division's biggest punchers is just ridiculous. Like cdogg said, try actually watching the fighters rather than looking up stats on BoxRec.

 

Like I said later in that thread "McCall is the one to have the issue with. I just think he hit hard based on seeing him waste some guys. His numbers tell a different story." Bruno, otoh, was a monster puncher with the stats to back it up.

I might be wrong on McCall, but the fact is he did waste some guys impressively. Average punchers don't tend to do that. He got rid of a lot of fighters early. His gray-haired career is making his numbers look worse than they otherwise would look. Then again, he went the distance with a lot of fighters a monster puncher probably wouldn't have.

 

Good thing you're not relying on BoxRec here...

 

Yeah and I countered with "WHO did Bruno knock out?"

Lamar Clark knocked out something like 44 straight guys... Of course, he never stopped anyone even sort of decent so it is meaningless

It's like equating Buck Smith with Willie Pep because they both had records like 135-1 and one point... Willie Pep was fighting world class fighters, Buck Smith was fighting clubfighters

And who said "McCall is an AVERAGE puncher"?

The choice isn't "All-time power puncher" or "Average puncher"... there's quite a few steps between the two... McCall had some pop, Bruno had some pop... Neither one of those guys hit anywhere near as hard as Lewis, Tyson or Ruddock... It's not open to debate

 

Yeah, but Smith had 120 KO wins which clearly makes him a bigger puncher than Thomas Hearns and his measly 48 KO wins.

What's awesomely funny about Smith's resume is that he fought Reggie Strickland 5 times. I watched him knock down and beat '88 Olympic Gold medalist "Kid" Wangila on the Leonard-Hearns II undercard but was robbed in a decision loss. Smith stopped Wangila in a rematch a couple of years later.

 

::

Yup... Smith's record is littered with all sorts of interesting characters, professional opponents like Strickland

 

i think in my mind that a person can hit very hard and not be skilled enough to punch anyone good very hard

 

I doubt post prison Tyson could have beaten anyone very good. certainly post bite Tyson couldn't. Still hit really, really hard, like.

 

Yep, if power alone was such an overwhelming factor there's probably a lot of guys we've never even heard of who should have been champions.

 

Smith did beat Kirky though

 

You're really a dim bulb.

No offense.

 

Coming from you...that means absolutely nothing.

 

Not exactly a huge accomplishment.

 

i thnk in my mind deat brumo pounches hard bich

 

Post-bite Tyson wouldve still KTFO Moorer

 

Out of people who consistently post about boxing, you are the dumbest cunt here.

 

You're extremely effeminate.

 

That'll be another win for me, pussy

 

Did Boxrec tell you so??

 

::