Frank Bruno vs George Foreman, 1990

Two big strong powerful but slow heavyweights.

Who wins?

(I'll give my opinion later)

 

A smart, older fighter, against a moronic, younger fighter. Between Foreman trying to find a way to win this, and Bruno trying to find a way to lose this, the improbably's dying to happen.

 

Assuming Bruno wouldn't be scared shitless and would be able to give a good peformance, I think he would control early and bust George's face up some. Then Foreman would get going and after taking some big shots Bruno would lose his motivation to win. Then he'd lose his stamina and Foreman would walk to a victory

 

Frank folds late as always.

 

Yep, pretty much.

It's competitive throughout, Foreman gets a little busted up, but George outlasts him and stops him in the late rounds.

 

... and you have evidence that such a version exists?

 

The version that fought Tyson the second time probably qualifies.

 

methinks you misunderstood what i'm getting at.

 

Against Foreman, probably not

 

Foreman late

 

Interesting match up

 

Yeah, it is

Bruno could win every round and still get stopped late...

 

Foreman

Sorry Frank.

 

This.

 

In 1990??? Bruno.

 

Yeah I see Bruno winning this fairly comfortably to be honest. Plus I refuse to pick in favour of fighters who are content to lose rounds in the search for a big punch.

 

It always seemed to me that 1990 Foreman was a sight better/more dangerous than >1994 Foreman

 

word.

 

To be expected, of course coz 4 years when you're already 40 is a LONG ass time. Similarly big difference in Hopkins, if we're honest.