Frank Bruno v Spinks/Berbick 1986...?

[Stevie G]

Frank Bruno gave a good account of himself,before he ran out of gas against Tim Witherspoon in 1986. Imo,Witherspoon was the best of the three titleholders at the time. The other two being Michael Spinks and Trevor Berbick. How would Frank have fared if he'd gone in with these other two,instead of 'Terrible Tim' ? I think he'd have found Spinks a bit too tricky,and lost to him on points,after causing Michael concern early on. I'd give him the best chance against Berbick,though I can't be certain. Thoughts ?

[TBooze]

Bruno was not interested in Berbick, Trevor was all wrong for him, and would of beaten the Bomber.

Bruno was up for the Spinks fight, he was confident he could take out the smaller man, and I think he may of been right...

But if Spinks did survive the first five rounds, and still had a bit left, he would of had Frank out of there by the tenth.

Personally I think the most interesting scenario would of been if the Tubbs/Witherspoon fight had been called a no-decision after the Terrible one's drug test failure.

Bruno fighting Tubbs in front of 40,000 screaming fans at Wembley one July morning... Would a potentially unmotivated out of shape Tubbs really be up for gutting out the initial onslaught?

I think Bruno may of got the job done there.

[Unforgiven]

He might have beaten Berbick, but not by KO. Berbick held the WBC title, the only organization that sanction 12-round title fights at the time. Bruno might have managed to beat Berbick - who could be extremely lacklustre at times - over 12. I wouldn't count on it though.

Cant see Bruno beating Spinks.

Witherspoon may (or may not) have been the best of the three, but he didn't even train for Bruno.

[Unforgiven]

Personally I think the most interesting scenario would of been if the Tubbs/Witherspoon fight had been called a no-decision after the Terrible one's drug test failure.

Bruno fighting Tubbs in front of 40,000 screaming fans at Wembley one July morning... Would a potentially unmotivated out of shape Tubbs really be up for gutting out the initial onslaught?

I think Bruno may of got the job done there.

I think Tubbs was a better boxer than Witherspoon, and Tim just stood there with Bruno slugging it out. I can see Tubbs, even fat and wobbly, spoiling Bruno's onslaught, keep Bruno off-balance and just picking him off with fast jabs and straight rights. Bruno would hit him with some hurtful shots, but nothing he dont see coming.

[TBooze]

I think Tubbs was a better boxer than Witherspoon, and Tim just stood there with Bruno slugging it out. I can see Tubbs, even fat and wobbly, spoiling Bruno's onslaught, keep Bruno off-balance and just picking him off with fast jabs and straight rights. Bruno would hit him with some hurtful shots, but nothing he dont see coming.

Maybe Tubbs' lack of power may of given Bruno the confidence to really go at TNT. It was felt in Britain after the Coetzee fight, that although Tubbs was then unbeaten, style wise it was better for The Bomber that Tubbs won his upcoming bout with Witherspoon.

Confidence being Bruno's real Achilles heel...

That said I agree Tubbs had the tools to do the job, and the longer the fight went ,the greater the chance of a Tubbs win. And if we got into the championship rounds, even if Tubbs was behind, I have little doubt he would still won by late stoppage.

[Unforgiven]

Maybe Tubbs' lack of power may of given Bruno the confidence to really go at TNT. It was felt in Britain after the Coetzee fight, that although Tubbs was then unbeaten, style wise it was better for The Bomber that Tubbs won his upcoming bout with Witherspoon.

The Bruno-Coetzee fight happened after Tubbs-Witherspoon, so that discussion must have happened earlier OR pertained to the prospect of Tubbs-Witherspoon 2 happening before Bruno got his chance. I seem to remember Tubbs took step-aside fee to allow Bruno his challenge.

Anyway, yeah, you're right, Tubbs lack of power might have given Bruno the green light to try to bomb him out quick. And Bruno's determination in the Witherspoon fight proved admirable. But I still consider it a long-shot, esp. in hindsight. Tubbs was quality (and why do I feel strange typing that ? :lol:) ...... but he was, in some sort of way that Bruno wasn't.



Confidence being Bruno's real Achilles heel...

That said I agree Tubbs had the tools to do the job, and the longer the fight went ,the greater the chance of a Tubbs win. And if we got into the championship rounds, even if Tubbs was behind, I have little doubt he would still won by late stoppage.


With the FIFTEEN ROUND distance being in effect, I cant think of any of the 80s alphabet champions losing to Bruno if the fight went beyond 9 or 10.
I'm not sure any of them lose to him earlier either (maybe Tate ? Maybe Coetzee of the Page fight ? Maybe Dokes of the Coetzee fight ? .... I'd have to think about it).

[TBooze]

The Bruno-Coetzee fight happened after Tubbs-Witherspoon, so that discussion must have happened earlier OR pertained to the prospect of Tubbs-Witherspoon 2 happening before Bruno got his chance. I seem to remember Tubbs took step-aside fee to allow Bruno his challenge.

Anyway, yeah, you're right, Tubbs lack of power might have given Bruno the green light to try to bomb him out quick. And Bruno's determination in the Witherspoon fight proved admirable. But I still consider it a long-shot, esp. in hindsight. Tubbs was quality (and why do I feel strange typing that ? :lol:) ...... but he was, in some sort of way that Bruno wasn't.

Yep, of course you are right about the dates, and I find it weird it was just presumed that Bruno would beat Coetzee. Mind you the thought was Bruno would not fight Coetzee, because of the situation in South Africa, indeed there was a protest on the night of the fight.




With the FIFTEEN ROUND distance being in effect, I cant think of any of the 80s alphabet champions losing to Bruno if the fight went beyond 9 or 10.
I'm not sure any of them lose to him earlier either (maybe Tate ? Maybe Coetzee of the Page fight ? Maybe Dokes of the Coetzee fight ? .... I'd have to think about it).

I quite agree, Bruno is not even beating Dokes or Page, his one big shot (although timing meant it probably could not happen), would of been to of got Weaver out inside two; and if he failed Weaver wins inside ten as well IMO.

[mr. magoo]

I think its conceivable that by 1986, Frank Bruno could have beaten both Trevor Berbick and Michael Spinks. Bruno had previously outboxed James Smith and Tim Witherspoon before being stopped very late. I think he could have possibly done the same thing to Berbick, with the only difference, that Trevor did not have the power to bale himself out the way that Spoon and Smith did. Michael Spinks didn't impress me much following his meetings with Holmes.. At the age of 30, and with most of his interest in boxing behind him, he was ready to be taken. I'm also not sure that he was well made to be taking on big punchers at heavyweight. Yes, he fought a huge puncher in Cooney, but I'm talking about a man who's active fighting, in good condition and not just looking for a quick paycheck... That man was Frank Bruno.

[The Kurgan]

I think its conceivable that by 1986, Frank Bruno could have beaten both Trevor Berbick and Michael Spinks. Bruno had previously outboxed James Smith and Tim Witherspoon before being stopped very late. I think he could have possibly done the same thing to Berbick, with the only difference, that Trevor did not have the power to bale himself out the way that Spoon and Smith did. Michael Spinks didn't impress me much following his meetings with Holmes.. At the age of 30, and with most of his interest in boxing behind him, he was ready to be taken. I'm also not sure that he was well made to be taking on big punchers at heavyweight. Yes, he fought a huge puncher in Cooney, but I'm talking about a man who's active fighting, in good condition and not just looking for a quick paycheck... That man was Frank Bruno.

Agreed. I think Bruno-Berbick would pan out in a similar way to Bruno-Cummings. Even if Berbick hurts Bruno, I don't think he had the finishing ability and the power required to finish the job. Berbick wasn't a terrible title holder, but he wasn't really championship material.

Spinks-Bruno would be an interesting fight. I think it would look curiously like much of Holmes-Spinks II, since when Holmes went forward he was a jab-orientated boxer in the same way that Bruno was. However, that was a far more natural style for Bruno who- while slower than Holmes- was harder to hit with the jab or counter than Holmes, especially the Holmes of the mid-80s. I think Bruno's combination of strength, power and ability to deal with good boxers would probably give him the edge, although it's certainly conceivable that Spinks rallies in the second half to either take a decision or even stop Bruno.

[Unforgiven]

Yep, of course you are right about the dates, and I find it weird it was just presumed that Bruno would beat Coetzee.

It stands out as one of the only big-risk fights on Bruno's record. And Bruno's managers were notoriously protective. Coetzee was finish but only two fights removed from the WBA title. I'd like to know what Terry Lawless and Duff etc. knew about Coetzee, I'd like to see Coetzee-Tillis from 1985 to see how gone Coetzee was going in.

There's a theory that with Don King controlling all the heavyweights and jumping on the anti-apartheid wagon (also known to Don King as the anti-Bob Arum bandwagon), and with the South Africa in sport issue coming to a head generally, Coetzee knew he'd never actually get a shot at the title again, and gave up training for fights. He took the Bruno fight for the payday and promptly retired.
Not that Bruno wasn't excellent in that one. He was about as explosive and dangerous as he ever would be. Coetzee just represented no real opposition on the night.

[Unforgiven]

Berbick looked pretty good against Thomas.
I think Bruno would have had to get a sleep-walking Berbick to beat him, but that Berbick was not a rarity.

From where I'm sitting, Bruno aint beating Spinks, and he aint beating an old Larry Holmes either.

[mr. magoo]

Agreed. I think Bruno-Berbick would pan out in a similar way to Bruno-Cummings. Even if Berbick hurts Bruno, I don't think he had the finishing ability and the power required to finish the job. Berbick wasn't a terrible title holder, but he wasn't really championship material.

Spinks-Bruno would be an interesting fight. I think it would look curiously like much of Holmes-Spinks II, since when Holmes went forward he was a jab-orientated boxer in the same way that Bruno was. However, that was a far more natural style for Bruno who- while slower than Holmes- was harder to hit with the jab or counter than Holmes, especially the Holmes of the mid-80s. I think Bruno's combination of strength, power and ability to deal with good boxers would probably give him the edge, although it's certainly conceivable that Spinks rallies in the second half to either take a decision or even stop Bruno.

Indeed,

Focussing specifically on Michael Spinks, the only real heavyweight showing of Spinks that impressed me, was the first fight with Holmes, and frankly I think Larry was in poor shape and probably complacent for that match.. Eight months later, a 36 year old Holmes would show up ready to wage war, and the ultimate concensus, is that Michael lost that fight.. The Cooney and Tangstad affairs were nothing more than Spinks padding both his walet and record. By the time he stepped in the ring with Tyson in 1988, he looked like he had about as much interest in boxing as a 10 year old has in going to get a tooth extracted. I know it sounds like I'm being very hard on Spinks, but that isn't my intent.. My point is that he was an all time great at light heavyweight, and made an exremely admirable effort in stepping to win the heavyweight crown....But, after that one HUGE fight, I think it was over.. The Frank Bruno who nearly beat a prime Witherspoon, and KO'd Coetzee in a single round would have been a serious threat to a declining and uncaring Spinks..

[Ezzard]

Spinks was unoffically retired by the 2nd Holmes figth. He just wnated to land the biggest pay day he could for hsi pension, without taking too much of a risk. He would never have put a fight with Tyson in jeopardy because of the money.

[Unforgiven]

The Cooney and Tangstad affairs were nothing more than Spinks padding both his walett and record.

Bruno would have represented stiffer opposition, but not by much. Bruno was not Larry Holmes (who actually looked pretty good in the 1986 rematch). Yes, I know Bruno could hit, but Spinks would have known that too. Spinks would be cautious and he'd be a puzzle. Bruno wouldn't do much with him.

The Frank Bruno who nearly beat a prime Witherspoon, and KO'd Coetzee in a single round would have been a serious threat to a declining and uncaring Spinks..

Well, your speculation on Spinks' motivation post-1985 is valid .... BUT he sure as hell looked several degrees more motivated than Coetzee and what you call a "prime Witherspoon" who was really out-of-shape, enjoying a holiday in the UK (he's been back often ever since !), undertrained, and just stood there with Bruno and outlasted him.

Bruno just wasn't good enough to beat Spinks.

[mr. magoo]

Bruno would have represented stiffer opposition, but not by much. Bruno was not Larry Holmes (who actually looked pretty good in the 1986 rematch). Yes, I know Bruno could hit, but Spinks would have known that too. Spinks would be cautious and he'd be a puzzle. Bruno wouldn't do much with him.



Well, your speculation on Spinks' motivation post-1985 is valid .... BUT he sure as hell looked several degrees more motivated than Coetzee and what you call a "prime Witherspoon" who was really out-of-shape, enjoying a holiday in the UK (he's been back often ever since !), undertrained, and just stood there with Bruno and outlasted him.

Bruno just wasn't good enough to beat Spinks.


Okay I'll meet you halfway on this one.. IF Michael Spinks had shown up in truly top physical and mental condition, with every intent of retaining his title, and didn't try anything foolish, then I could see him being the favorite against Bruno... These are very important IF's however......

[mr. magoo]

Bruno would have represented stiffer opposition, but not by much.


I want to revisit this one comment..

In 1986, Bruno was leagues better than both Cooney and Tangstad... Gerry had fought perhaps 3 times in 5 years, showed up at a career high weight, had spent much of the past few years enjoying the good life and hardly looked focus... Stephen Tangstad was probably not even a top 25 guy.... Bruno was way better than these two were by that point, and was certainly a man who would never even think of showing up to a fight in anything less than perfect condition....

[Unforgiven]

I want to revisit this one comment..

In 1986, Bruno was leagues better than both Cooney and Tangstad... Gerry had fought perhaps 3 times in 5 years, showed up at a career high weight, had spent much of the past few years enjoying the good life and hardly looked focus... Stephen Tangstad was probably not even a top 25 guy.... Bruno was way better than these two were by that point, and was certainly a man who would never even think of showing up to a fight in anything less than perfect condition....

Yeah, that's fair.
Bruno was a few notches above those bums.

[Rubber Warrior]

I think for Spinks against Bruno it would come down to how well he could handle Frank's long,underrated left jab and his ability to use his mobility. Spinks had a way of throwing a guy's timing off, plus he'd have Eddie Futch in his corner.

[natonic]

I think Bruno over Berbick. I don't see a KO either way. I think Berbick would eat a lot of jabs and right hands trying to turn it into a mauling.
I'd favor Spinks over Bruno. Spinks was as crafty as they come for a Heavyweight and I think he disrupt Bruno's very good but very vanilla offensive attack.

[TBooze]

I want to revisit this one comment..

In 1986, Bruno was leagues better than both Cooney and Tangstad... Gerry had fought perhaps 3 times in 5 years, showed up at a career high weight, had spent much of the past few years enjoying the good life and hardly looked focus... Stephen Tangstad was probably not even a top 25 guy.... Bruno was way better than these two were by that point, and was certainly a man who would never even think of showing up to a fight in anything less than perfect condition....

Tangsted yes, but I cannot see The Bomber beating Cooney in 1986.