How good was Joe Bugner in the 1970s

[newbridgeboxing]

Joe bugner was the best that the British had to offer in terms of heavyweight boxers during the 70s .

After studying some tapes on him he was a VERY capable fighter , but just seemed to lack the passion to win .

How would he fair in todays heavyweight scene?, alot of people forget Joe Bugner during the 1970s, but he gave Ali and Frazier a good fright .

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Russell]

Lack of passion may have been due to him accidentally killing a man in the ring very early in his career.

[Rattler]

An excellent athlete turned boxer who wasn't the same after the death of Ulric Regis - didn't have the desire to attack consistently, too reliant upon his defense.

[Raging B(_)LL]

Joe would do well today, would likely win a belt before losing it in an uninspired performance to someone he should have beaten. As you already pointed out in your opening post his lack of inner fire would always mean he would never hold on to any belt for long, he just wasn`t a fighter at heart. He was a very capable boxer though and knew he could make some dough from fighting so he stuck with it, but he was always conscious of wanting to keep his brains intact after he retired and thus he fought accordingly by employing a mainly safety first style.

[he grant]

I'm with the Bull once again ...

[WhataRock]

Joe would do well today, would likely win a belt before losing it in an uninspired performance to someone he should have beaten. As you already pointed out in your opening post his lack of inner fire would always mean he would never hold on to any belt for long, he just wasn`t a fighter at heart. He was a very capable boxer though and knew he could make some dough from fighting so he stuck with it, but he was always conscious of wanting to keep his brains intact after he retired and thus he fought accordingly by employing a mainly safety first style.

Having heard him commentate I think his plan of keeping his brains intact failed miserably.

[kenmore]

Bugner was unquestionably a world class heavyweight, and he was a legitimate top 10 contender for most of the '70s. Many boxing fans and journalists fail to give Bugner credit for this. As a result, many of today's fans don't realize how good Bugner was.

I followed Bugner's career in the '70s, and here's how I'd rate Bugner relative to his peers in the 1972-77 period (pre-Larry Holmes period):

Guys who were better than Bugner:

1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Frazier
3. George Foreman
4. Ken Norton
5. Jerry Quarry
6. Jimmy Young

Guys who were roughly equal to Bugner (winner would depend on who was having the better day):

1. Ron Lyle
2. Ernie Shavers
3. Oscar Bonavena

Guys who Bugner could definitely beat:

1. Jimmy Ellis
2. Floyd Patterson
3. Duane Bobick
4. Stan Ward
5. Ernie Terrell
6. Chuck Wepner
7. Scott LeDoux
8. Mac Foster
9. Al "Blue" Lewis

As to Bugner supposedly lacking "passion" or aggressive drive, I disagree. I think Bugner was just not a natural offensive fighter, hence he seemed passive too often. Bugner functioned chiefly by fighting defensively, waiting his opponent out, and dominating with his lightning quick left jab. He tended not to take chances.

Strong fighters who could force Bugner into his defensive shell gave him trouble.

[he grant]

Bugner was a very talented fighter although not a huge puncher ...

There is a very good doc on him on Youtube you can access that is very interesting about his fight with Henry Cooper ...

[Bummy Davis]

Joe was a big strong kid who did not too hard, could box a little but was content with going through the motions and surviving..His size was a factor vs Ali and Frazier but he did not really fight like he thought he could win, still there was a lot of garbage in the 70's and Joe was not garbage...He would get blasted by Vlad or Vitali and Valuev and Chagaev should have no touble beating him

[Mantequilla]

oh c'mon, valuev is hopeless.

[Russell]

Having heard him commentate I think his plan of keeping his brains intact failed miserably.

:rofl:rofl:rofl

[DamonD]

Different styles but...a bit 'Larry Donald' if you see what I mean.
Certainly had the tools to succeed at the top level, and had some good wins, but you're left feeling they never quite brought everything to the ring.

[TBooze]

1970's or 2000's Joe would always find a way to blow it. The Frazier fight showed Bugner could easily compete with any fighter now a days, but Joe was just glad to be there and not prepared to go the extra mile to make him a champ.

Say what you want about the Klitschko's, but they do train properly and do what it takes to get the job done, something I never saw Joe do against the best, the Frazier fight just proving the rule.;)

[kenmore]

He would get blasted by Vlad or Vitali and Valuev and Chagaev should have no touble beating him

Bugner would probably have stood a 50/50 chance of victory against Valuev and Chagaev. In fact, I might even give Bugner a very slight edge against both guys.

The Klitschko brothers would have beaten Bugner decisively, but Bugner would have gone the distance in both cases. Here, Bugner's durability, size, and defensive acumen would see him through to the final bell.

[timmers612]

Tbooze, the Frazier of the Bugner fight was not,,,,smoking Joe by any means. Joe was in slow motion sparring the whole way and when he floored Bugner he held back on his follow up hook as Bugner was going down. Later Joe was asked why he held back that punch on the wide open Englishman and he said, I didn't want my mom to be mad at me. Now you tell me that was a fired up Frazier!

[TBooze]

Tbooze, the Frazier of the Bugner fight was not,,,,smoking Joe by any means. Joe was in slow motion sparring the whole way and when he floored Bugner he held back on his follow up hook as Bugner was going down. Later Joe was asked why he held back that punch on the wide open Englishman and he said, I didn't want my mom to be mad at me. Now you tell me that was a fired up Frazier!

No, you are right it was not vintage Frazier, but it still was at least the fourth best Heavyweight of a golden period in the division, and Bugner actually tried for a change.

[jowcol]

Bugner was unquestionably a world class heavyweight, and he was a legitimate top 10 contender for most of the '70s. Many boxing fans and journalists fail to give Bugner credit for this. As a result, many of today's fans don't realize how good Bugner was.
I followed Bugner's career in the '70s, and here's how I'd rate Bugner relative to his peers in the 1972-77 period (pre-Larry Holmes period):
Guys who were better than Bugner:
1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Frazier
3. George Foreman
4. Ken Norton
5. Jerry Quarry
6. Jimmy Young
Guys who were roughly equal to Bugner (winner would depend on who was having the better day):
1. Ron Lyle
2. Ernie Shavers
3. Oscar Bonavena
Guys who Bugner could definitely beat:
1. Jimmy Ellis
2. Floyd Patterson
3. Duane Bobick
4. Stan Ward
5. Ernie Terrell
6. Chuck Wepner
7. Scott LeDoux
8. Mac Foster
9. Al "Blue" Lewis
As to Bugner supposedly lacking "passion" or aggressive drive, I disagree. I think Bugner was just not a natural offensive fighter, hence he seemed passive too often. Bugner functioned chiefly by fighting defensively, waiting his opponent out, and dominating with his lightning quick left jab. He tended not to take chances.
Strong fighters who could force Bugner into his defensive shell gave him trouble.

I've said this before in earlier posts. Early 70's I had the highest hopes for this guy, seemed to have all the tools. Wrong!!! Many guys thruout history were like him...he simply didn't want to fight! His big fights? Went into a shell and got his arse kicked! Pussy!!! Sorry, but that's the only way I can say it. And don't even bring up his 80's-90's efforts which amounted to nothing...What was Joe's biggest win? He beat NOBODY outside of journeymen and over-the-hill contenders...look at his record. Paid good bucks to see him and Ali closed circuit in 1975 for the title...thank god we had Galindez-Ahumada and Monzon-Licata on the undercard. His best fight? Frazier? A losing effort against a guy who was fighting, for the first time in his career, after getting his arse handed to him? Bugner doesn't belong in any catagory of, "the best fighters who were never champ" rating...he was a 'something that never was'. Hell, he 'beat' a 37-38 year old Cooper in 71-72 and virtually all the pundits at ringside thought that 'enry had won.
Cooper's biggest win? How about a 1958 decision against a prime Zora Folley and that trumps anything mr. underachieving Joe EVER did!
Patterson-Ellis-Terrell prime beat this guy any day of the week...

My $0.02

[Bokaj]

Hell, he 'beat' a 37-38 year old Cooper in 71-72 and virtually all the pundits at ringside thought that 'enry had won.


Bugner has himself admitted that it was Cooper's fight. I liked his jab against Ali, though. It looked very sharp. But his overall performance was disappointing. Wepner, with less than half the talent, was a much better example of how you should conduct yourself when getting the opportunity of a lifetime.

[Bokaj]

Hell, he 'beat' a 37-38 year old Cooper in 71-72 and virtually all the pundits at ringside thought that 'enry had won.


Bugner has himself admitted that it was Cooper's fight. I liked his jab against Ali, though. It looked very sharp. But his overall performance was disappointing. Wepner, with less than half the talent, was a much better example of how you should conduct yourself when getting the opportunity of a lifetime.

[Bokaj]

Hell, he 'beat' a 37-38 year old Cooper in 71-72 and virtually all the pundits at ringside thought that 'enry had won.


Bugner has himself admitted that it was Cooper's fight. I liked his jab against Ali, though. It looked very sharp. But his overall performance was disappointing. Wepner, with less than half the talent, was a much better example of how you should conduct yourself when getting the opportunity of a lifetime.

[Russell]

Bugner would be favored over Mac Foster and Floyd Patterson?

Say what?

[kenmore]

Bugner would be favored over Mac Foster and Floyd Patterson?

Say what?

Bugner whipped Mac Foster in their 1973 London fight. It was a one sided decision, with Bugner winning at least eight of the ten rounds. The other two rounds were even.

I believe the 1970s version of Bugner whips the 1970s version of Floyd Patterson. Hands down. Bugner was simply too big and rangy for the smallish Floyd. Joe would have commanded this fight with his left jab. Anytime Floyd tried to accomplish anything, he would have been tied up by Bugner, who was the much bigger, stronger man at 6'4", 227 lbs. to Floyd's 6'0", 190 lbs.

Remember also that Bugner had a chin like a rock and his defense was pretty good. He was a highly competent boxer who pumped his left jab effectively. I cannot picture the aging Floyd Patterson succeeding against a prime Bugner.

[kenmore]

Bugner has himself admitted that it was Cooper's fight.

I don't believe that Bugner was being truthfu when he "admitted" it was Cooper's fight. This is something Bugner said only recently, after being the beneficiary of a fundraiser in England for his medical problems. Cooper contributed to the fund, so Bugner was obligated to be gracious.

I have watched the Bugner-Cooper fight several times -- including once in slow motion -- and it is clear to me that the decision could have legitimately gone either way. The verdict in favor of Bugner was very fair. By far the most frequent punch landed in the bout was Bugner's left jab.

Basically, who is perceived as the winner depends on the viewer's scoring philosophy. Cooper arguably could have gotten the decision for ring generalship, as he kept Bugner on the run all night, constantly stalking him with the left hook. On the other hand, if you favor the guy who lands the most punches and scores the most points, Bugner looks to the be the winner, as he connected with his left jab all night long.

[kenmore]

Tbooze, the Frazier of the Bugner fight was not,,,,smoking Joe by any means. Joe was in slow motion sparring the whole way and when he floored Bugner he held back on his follow up hook as Bugner was going down. Later Joe was asked why he held back that punch on the wide open Englishman and he said, I didn't want my mom to be mad at me. Now you tell me that was a fired up Frazier!

Let's look at it this way: just one year later Frazier totally demolished top contender Jerry Quarry. That tells us something about how dangerous Frazier still was in the 1973-74 period.

I think Frazier looked less than devastating against Bugner because of Bugner's huge size advantage and because of Bugner's style.

[timmers612]

Kenmore, Bugner deserves to remembered as a legit contender, which he was. I'm not so sure he had the rock jaw though, the hook Frazier dumped him with was far from some of the ones that swelled Ali's jaw in their first bout, and had he followed up on Bugner the bout may have ended in the 11th. He held his hands high and usually this kept the bombs from landing on him. I was just thinking if he had fought Johanson in his prime, would have Ingo's bingo ko'd him?

[kenmore]

Kenmore, Bugner deserves to remembered as a legit contender, which he was. I'm not so sure he had the rock jaw though, the hook Frazier dumped him with was far from some of the ones that swelled Ali's jaw in their first bout, and had he followed up on Bugner the bout may have ended in the 11th. He held his hands high and usually this kept the bombs from landing on him. I was just thinking if he had fought Johanson in his prime, would have Ingo's bingo ko'd him?

The hook Frazier landed on Bugner in round 11 was devastating. There is no reason to believe that that hook was any less powerful than the ones that landed on Ali in 1971. What's the basis for comparison?

I do agree that Frazier could have finished Bugner off if he had followed up with another hook as Bugner was going down. But it's also true that his hook might have finished off any heavyweight in the same circumstances.

There is no doubt about Bugner's extraordinary durability. Interviews with contenders of the '70s who fought or sparred with Bugner attest to this.

Ingo could punch, certainly, but I don't believe he hit harder than Frazier, Lyle or Shavers, and we saw how Bugner withstood the bombs of those heavy bangers.

As for the outcome of a Bugner-Ingo fight, Bugner would have won comfortably. Ingo was no bigger than 6'0", 195lbs., and he would have been at a disadvantage against Bugner at long range boxing.

[Bigcat]

Jo Bugner was very good, he could have created more of a stir if he would have exploded during fights and let his fast hands go a lot more.. Joe always just did enough and in any other era could have easily obtained a championship. He had everything , height speed and when he wanted he had enough power to stop a lot of very good contenders with his mix of speed and strength... His son turned out a half decent heavyweight in the 90's but now he runs a fleet of night club and security doormen around the London area.. Look at what Joe did when he managed a comeback at a rediculous age , he beat a still useful Greg Page in Australia and a quite lively James Tillis too... He had no place in the ring with Bruno !!!!

[Mendoza]

I know some hard-core guys who feel Bugner was better than Quarry! I'm not sure if I can agree with that, but their reasoning goes Bugner did far better vs Frazier or Ali than Quarry did.

Bugner was good, but he lacked the power and aggression to make it to the top. If he was around today, he might be able to pick up a belt not held by a Klitschko. Yes—I think Bugner would have beaten Valuev. I view Bugner as a bottom level top 100 heavy.

[Bokaj]

I know some hard-core guys who feel Bugner was better than Quarry! I'm not sure if I can agree with that, but their reasoning goes Bugner did far better vs Frazier or Ali than Quarry did.

That's basing a guy's legacy too much on his loosing efforts. Quarry beat the likes of Patterson, Lyle and Shavers. Bugner didn't beat anyone of that magnitude and actually lost to the latter two. So...

[timmers612]

Kenmore, you have some really good points at that. The reason, and I may be wrong here, I didn't put the hook that put Bugner down with for instance the one that had Ali on queer street in their first fight, is that Joe wasn't winding up from the waist as he had. I mentioned he was slow motion sparring in this fight by comparison and thats how I saw the motion he threw that hook with also. On Ingo's punch Patterson said it was harder then Liston's.

[Bigcat]

Let me get this straight... I think at the highest level, Jerry was a more natural puncher and probably the better and more solid performer..

[Russell]

Bugner whipped Mac Foster in their 1973 London fight. It was a one sided decision, with Bugner winning at least eight of the ten rounds. The other two rounds were even.


In one of Foster's last career fights 20 pounds above his best weight.

Foster wasn't the greatest fighter of the decade but was underrated if you ask me.

He was only stopped once against Quarry, his other five losses all being 10 round and 15 round decisions, including 15 against Ali.

His power is well known, and surprisingly he could box pretty well. He was definitely no one dimensional slugger who tired in a handful of rounds.

[Unforgiven]

Notable names he beat - Mac Foster, Jimmy Ellis and Henry Cooper (controversially) in the 1970s. None of whom were still among the most worthy contenders. They were all on the downgrade. Some might say "has-beens" though that's perhaps unfair.

Went the distance in losing fights with Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier and Ron Lyle. And Larry Middleton and Jack Bodell.

Beat a sprinkling of others, mostly limited journeymen at best.

Those are the bare facts on paper.

Yeah, he was pretty good. The Frazier fight probably his most glorious moment.

But I dont think any argument that he was "unlucky to be in such a strong era" ring true. Maybe he picks up an alphabet title in more recent times if he gets the right fights. But he'd never beat the Tysons or Holyfields, and he could lose to someone ordinary.

[kenmore]

I know some hard-core guys who feel Bugner was better than Quarry! I'm not sure if I can agree with that, but their reasoning goes Bugner did far better vs Frazier or Ali than Quarry did.



Bugner had trouble with guys who were aggressive enough and strong enough to keep the pressure on him. This is because Bugner wasn't much of an infighter, and his chief way of dealing with pressure was to go into a defensive shell until his opponent burned out. For this reason, I would pick a strong, durable, skilled and hard-hitting fighter like Quarry to beat Bugner by decision. I am assuming that we're talking about a prime Quarry here.

Bugner's weaknesses were that he didn't hit especially hard and he had a hard time getting his punches off on the offensive. Some critics felt that Bugner was somewhat musclebound, and that this hindered his offensive skills. Bugner was a weightlifter in his teen years, prior to taking up boxing, so maybe there's some truth to this.

[kenmore]

Notable names he beat - Mac Foster, Jimmy Ellis and Henry Cooper (controversially) in the 1970s. None of whom were still among the most worthy contenders. They were all on the downgrade. Some might say "has-beens" though that's perhaps unfair.

Went the distance in losing fights with Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier and Ron Lyle. And Larry Middleton and Jack Bodell.

Beat a sprinkling of others, mostly limited journeymen at best.

Those are the bare facts on paper.



It's important to remember that Bugner was a very young and inexperienced fighter when he lost to Bodell and Middleton. Joe only had 16 fights as an amateur, and at 21, he was just a few years into his pro career when he lost those fights.

Also, Bugner's losses after 1975 (including the Lyle fight) occured usually after very lengthy layoffs, so Bugner wasn't at his best.

It is true that Bugner didn't beat any truly serious contenders. The highest ranked guys he beat were Cooper, Ellis and Richard Dunn, each of whom was just barely rated within the worldwide top 10 when Bugner fought them. Cooper and Ellis were old and on their way out of the ratings at that point. Dunn wasn't really a legitimate contender to begin with, and he was ranked only because of a lack of top heavyweights at the time (1976).

[TBooze]

It's important to remember that Bugner was a very young and inexperienced fighter when he lost to Bodell and Middleton. Joe only had 16 fights as an amateur, and at 21, he was just a few years into his pro career when he lost those fights.

Also, Bugner's losses after 1975 (including the Lyle fight) occured usually after very lengthy layoffs, so Bugner wasn't at his best.

It is true that Bugner didn't beat any truly serious contenders. The highest ranked guys he beat were Cooper, Ellis and Richard Dunn, each of whom was just barely rated within the worldwide top 10 when Bugner fought them. Cooper and Ellis were old and on their way out of the ratings at that point. Dunn wasn't really a legitimate contender to begin with, and he was ranked only because of a lack of top heavyweights at the time (1976).

Going to Denmark and beating Eklund should not be over looked, it was a fair win at the time, but typical of Joe to then blow the Tangsted fight.

Joe also hit a fine run of form with his victories over Tillis, Bey and in particular a still useful Page. Some figured him to beat Bruno as well (I remember Terry Marsh having to dive off a bridge after Bomber Bruno's win).

[kenmore]

Going to Denmark and beating Eklund should not be over looked, it was a fair win at the time, but typical of Joe to then blow the Tangsted fight.


The Ecklund and Tangsted fights took place in 1984, when Bugner was 34 years old and just a shell of his former self. In these fights Bugner is much slower and less energetic than during his prime years. Thus, these fights should be forgotten when we assess Bugner's ability in his prime.

Also, the Tangsted fight was believed to be a robbery by many, if not most, who watched the fight.

[TBooze]

The Ecklund and Tangsted fights took place in 1984, when Bugner was 34 years old and just a shell of his former self. In these fights Bugner is much slower and less energetic than during his prime years. Thus, these fights should be forgotten when we assess Bugner's ability in his prime.

Also, the Tangsted fight was believed to be a robbery by many, if not most, who watched the fight.

No, I think they are evidence, indeed I believe the Bugner who beat Page may just of been the best vintage Joe Bugner there was, and was 36/37 by then. I can see that Bugner beating the Joe who fought Shavers or indeed Lyle.

I personally believe Frank Bruno had to put his finest performance in to beat the 37 year old Joe.

[jowcol]

Jo Bugner was very good, he could have created more of a stir if he would have exploded during fights and let his fast hands go a lot more.

If...If!!! That was his problem; he never created a stir because he never exploded. Plus, as some other posters have commented, tho he had the good jab, he was somewhat over muscled and wasn't very good at punching in combination. But all this doesn't really matter because he showed time and time again that he didn't have what it takes under that left tit of his and always came up short when given the big opportunities.

What IF my beloved Patterson had brought the same aggressive mind-set in all his fights that he brought into the second Ingo? Or more consistently exploded with his all-time HW lightning combos? He didn't because it wasn't in him to be that way. Had he tho, IMO you're looking at a much higher legacy and career respect not to mention a clear 3-0 run in his Quarry-Quarry-Ellis trifecta, etc...etc...