Frank Bruno and Anthony Joshua had very similar careers, But who was better?

Frank Bruno only lost to World Champions, and the only fighter to really beat him easily was Mike Tyson 'During their rematch. But Bruno was carrying an injury coming into that fight, which most likely did effect his performance. But regardless, Mike Tyson's performances was awesome. Great win'. Bruno would beat most heavyweight fighters around today, too much power 'More durable than many people give him credit for, and his boxing skills were very solid. Head to head in a hypothetical match up Frank Bruno does have a chance of beating Anthony Joshua. But overall on feats achieved during their career, Anthony Joshua is the superior fighter'. Anthony Joshua has achieved the pinnacle in every stage of boxing both in the Amateur ranks and professional 'Out of the three Heavyweight Mountains i.e. Tyson Fury, Anthony Joshua and Deontay WIlder. Yes, I have stated many times before that in combination they cleared out this heavyweight era. But it was Anthony Joshua who done most of the clearing out of the Division, systematically taking on all comers consistently at a higher level than both Tyson Fury and Deontay Wilder'. Note: It was Anthony Joshua who forced Wladimir Kiltschko into retirement and took the Heavyweight Division into a completely new dynasty not Tyson Fury 'Joshua fought the version of Kiltschko who Tyson Fury should have fought in their scheduled rematch. But unfortunately due to his then circumstance Fury pulled out of that fight twice, leaving Wladimir Kiltschko to endure three back to back training camps before eventually fighting Anthony Joshua. On April 29th 2017, Wladimir Kiltschko vs Anthony Joshua was the greatest heavyweight title fight of the past 25 years. On that night the Heavyweight Divisions was conclusively taken into a completely new dynasty, after Anthony Joshua knocked out Wladimir Kiltschko, and forced the last real all-time great Heavyweight Champion into retirement'. To conclude: So yes, I think it is quite clear that Anthony Joshua has been a better Champion than Frank Bruno 'And he has achieved more feats in the game. But Frank Bruno did fight during a by far more talented heavyweight era, and his resume is quite solid. Frank Bruno win or lose has no real bad performances, even in his last fight against Mike Tyson he basically just threw the tactics out the window and attempted to wade through Mike Tyson. The first round of the fight was top level, but then Mike Tyson began to just systematically take him part. It was a great stoppage by Mike Tyson technically, very sophisticated offensive game'. Both great British Heavyweight fighters 'Who have suffered from cliche stereotypes, that really are nonsense. Frank Bruno could fight, and he was durable. More Durable than Deontay Wilder that is for sure, solid fighter and it was a herculean effort for him to become a Heavyweight Champion during the 90's Heavyweight era' etc.

Aj, as much as I used to like frank I always felt like he was just another belt holder. Aj was the main man for a spell. He was a top 3 guy in the division for many years also

It does relate since he was always active wbc champion. Therefore not retired. Therefore still lineal. Case closed. It doesn't matter much as the point i was reply to was the one claiming AJ fought for Lineal when he didn't but he still lost This is true. Joshua claimed some costume jewelry in his quest (as did 29 of the 45 best heavyweights of the 21st century); from fringe contender Charles Martin (a Luis Ortiz victim), and from a retired Klitschko, who held no titles at the time, and from outpointing a pre-prime Parker; but he never fought for the actual Heavyweight title. Bruno, of course, did. That said, I agree with most of those expressing an opinion here, that Joshua was better navigated. H2H, it's a toss up I believe.

He did. And the WBC put out a statement saying they were going to wait and see. And again, the WBC has zero to do with the lineal championship anyway. It does relate since he was always active wbc champion. Therefore not retired. Therefore still lineal. Case closed. It doesn't matter much as the point i was reply to was the one claiming AJ fought for Lineal when he didn't but he still lost

AJ is more accomplished and has a better resume he also benefitted from having a better team and being in a weaker era. AJ will go down as better based on accomplishments but he wasn't a better boxer and would get ktfo head-to-head vs Bruno whose stance, style, stature was practically identical to Dubois only he hit a hell of a lot harder.

Josh has looked very bad in a few fights where it might cross your mind to think he'd lose to bruno. But no reason to think bruno would face the worst version of josh. Maybe the best version of josh beats bruno But as for career, josh is better

AJ by a mile.

No he didn't. He never formally advised WBC he was vacating the title and it was never vacant so no he was not retired. He did. And the WBC put out a statement saying they were going to wait and see. And again, the WBC has zero to do with the lineal championship anyway.

AJ and it aint even close...............

Joshua got overrated for trading knockdowns with a geriatric 42 year old wlad Joshua is near shot in his mid 30s, could you imagine him at 42 vs a 30 year old wlad? it would be a blood bath, but they made a big deal of him in his prime getting up off the canvas to beat a 42 year old dont disagree but that was the dynamic. It's not like Joshua waited for wlad to age. Joshua also beat guys in their primes like Parker Whyte and Ruiz. Wilder is the only one who has never beaten a good prime fighter. Remember ortiz was about 40 and not as good as those guys to begin with. 30 year old ortiz vs 40 year old wilder? Obviously ortiz wins. We could do this for a lot of fighters and fights but if only prime vs prime matters wilder literally has nothing good while Joshua does.

Joshua got overrated for trading knockdowns with a geriatric 42 year old wlad Joshua is near shot in his mid 30s, could you imagine him at 42 vs a 30 year old wlad? it would be a blood bath, but they made a big deal of him in his prime getting up off the canvas to beat a 42 year old

Joshua had the better career is what I'm hearing. At heavyweight, I don't go in for all those passed round & round Negocio sin escrúpulos titles as much as the quality of opposition measure, as a purist; but there should, in carefully thought out criteria, be a number of other metrics weighted, surely. We see a ceiling with both gents, examining the stumbles. That last part is where there might be more parity.

He did indeed try to vacate the WBC title. They simply refused to believe him. Not that it matters, because the alphabet soup belts have jack squat to do with the lineal championship in the first place. But he did, in fact, retire. Twice. And I don't honestly care about The Ring, and haven't since De La Hoya bought them. The TBRB is the legitimate independent ranking organization of record and has been since its inception. No he didn't. He never formally advised WBC he was vacating the title and it was never vacant so no he was not retired.

Tyson Fury was not retired during AJ Usyk. He was WBC champion and never vacated it. So AJ has never fought for Lineal. You are going by Ring taking the belt of him, because he claimed retirement, but he still had 1 of the 4 major titles and did not vacate it. The companies do what suits them. When it was convenient for the Ring, they thought as Fury claimed retirement, within days they decided to make the Ring belt vacant because they wanted to put it on the line for AJ Usyk for their convenience. WBC is one of the 4 major titles so as he never vacated it he was always active wbc champ therefore you cannot be classed as retired. Now Fury has claimed retirement 6 months ago but Ring still rank him every month in their top 10, shows they do what suits them. I may share (and should share, if I'm going to mention it), a tremendous back story of that epic goof made by The Ring, during a down era in the beloved magazines long history, and its 2nd fall from grace. The liniage of Britain's monarchs, the Christian Papacy, the NFL Championship, the U.S. presidency.......it's all been done, recorded, accepted. The one Heavyweight Championship of the world; same thing. There's no debate and no room for debate.

A lot of Brits will say Bruno because of nostalgia and he EXISTED in a better era, but AJ was better imo, not necessarily by a lot, but better. Bruno had the better jab, power and chins about equal, AJ faster and puts his shots together better. Obviously they both had the stereotype of being big, stiff bodybuilders with questionable stamina and a tendency to freeze up when shit went south, but it all applies more to Bruno imo.

I like Bruno but AJ was the better fighter. Bruno is seen as like a joke by some people, he wasn't. He has a fantastic jab, big power and his chin wasn't as bad as people made out. He gave Lennox a very tough night. But Brunos gas tank was shocking, and he WAS a stiff fighter. Overall Joshua is the better fighter BUT I think Bruno might be at him if they fought prime for prime. And yes, both statements can be true at the same time.

Tyson Fury was not retired during AJ Usyk. He was WBC champion and never vacated it. So AJ has never fought for Lineal. You are going by Ring taking the belt of him, because he claimed retirement, but he still had 1 of the 4 major titles and did not vacate it. The companies do what suits them. When it was convenient for the Ring, they thought as Fury claimed retirement, within days they decided to make the Ring belt vacant because they wanted to put it on the line for AJ Usyk for their convenience. WBC is one of the 4 major titles so as he never vacated it he was always active wbc champ therefore you cannot be classed as retired. Now Fury has claimed retirement 6 months ago but Ring still rank him every month in their top 10, shows they do what suits them. He did indeed try to vacate the WBC title. They simply refused to believe him. Not that it matters, because the alphabet soup belts have jack squat to do with the lineal championship in the first place. But he did, in fact, retire. Twice. And I don't honestly care about The Ring, and haven't since De La Hoya bought them. The TBRB is the legitimate independent ranking organization of record and has been since its inception.

And Anthony Joshua did, indeed, challenge for the lineal/TBRB/Ring world championship against Joshua in their second fight. Tyson Fury was retired at the time and Usyk and Joshua were the consensus top two fighters at the time. Usyk obviously won, but Joshua made the challenge. The lineage was Fury d. Klitschko Fury retires Fury d. Wilder to start a new lineage Fury retires Usyk d. Joshua to start a new lineage Tyson Fury was not retired during AJ Usyk. He was WBC champion and never vacated it. So AJ has never fought for Lineal. You are going by Ring taking the belt of him, because he claimed retirement, but he still had 1 of the 4 major titles and did not vacate it. The companies do what suits them. When it was convenient for the Ring, they thought as Fury claimed retirement, within days they decided to make the Ring belt vacant because they wanted to put it on the line for AJ Usyk for their convenience. WBC is one of the 4 major titles so as he never vacated it he was always active wbc champ therefore you cannot be classed as retired. Now Fury has claimed retirement 6 months ago but Ring still rank him every month in their top 10, shows they do what suits them.

I beleive that Usyk won the heavyweight title from Fury, after his series with Joshua. Don't really take all those Fury retirements as a reason to vacate the title. You win it and you lose it in the ring, as a novel concept. But your thoughts are as valid as mine are. Joe Louis was considered to be fighting for the vacant lineal championship upon his return, even though he retired for a shorter duration than Fury and no new champion was crowned in his absence. I apply the same rules to Fury.

And Anthony Joshua did, indeed, challenge for the lineal/TBRB/Ring world championship against Joshua in their second fight. Tyson Fury was retired at the time and Usyk and Joshua were the consensus top two fighters at the time. Usyk obviously won, but Joshua made the challenge. The lineage was Fury d. Klitschko Fury retires Fury d. Wilder to start a new lineage Fury retires Usyk d. Joshua to start a new lineage I beleive that Usyk won the heavyweight title from Fury, after his series with Joshua. Don't really take all those Fury retirements as a reason to vacate the title. You win it and you lose it in the ring, as a novel concept. But your thoughts are as valid as mine are.