Would Tommy Burns learn new skills in a modern 101 Boxing class?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by reznick, Sep 12, 2017.


  1. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,901
    7,643
    Mar 17, 2010
    Can you walk us through the point in training in which Tommy Burns learns/employs these evolutionary techniques?

    What does that look like?
     
  2. mrkoolkevin

    mrkoolkevin Never wrestle with pigs or argue with fools Full Member

    18,440
    9,605
    Jan 30, 2014
    I don't think I've seen enough Burns to speculate, tbh. Did he fight many skilled, mobile opponents who controlled distance while scoring with straight punches from the outside? Guys who he had to work very hard to get into his punching range against, while being strafed with jabs and crosses from a moving target? That's where the techniques of boxing become most consequential for shorter fighters.
     
  3. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. Full Member

    55,255
    10,363
    Jun 29, 2007
    Well he was a determined type of fighter with a good amount of speed and power for his size, but at 5'7" tall, probably weighing close to what Canleo will be come Saturday night, he really is not a heavyweight.

    Did Burns ever stop anyone who would have been ranked at the top 5 at heavyweight when he fought them? Likely not.

    His best stoppage win is likely Squires ( On film KO1 ) but Squires was KO'd 10 times in 34 matches or Flynn who was KO'd 26 times.

    Burns would be a middle or super middle today, maybe a light heavy at the tail end of his career.
     
  4. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,901
    7,643
    Mar 17, 2010
    This feels like a vague non answer.
    What specific evolutionary techniques would he learn, and how would he learn them? Can you walk us through a concrete example? And when doing so, can you assure us that you're accounting for stylistic variance?
     
  5. mrkoolkevin

    mrkoolkevin Never wrestle with pigs or argue with fools Full Member

    18,440
    9,605
    Jan 30, 2014
    Given that I haven't seen a whole lot of Burns (none of us have) what you're seeking is patently absurd. How would I know what Burns has learned and not learned? He was hopelessly outmatched against Jack Johnson and the other fights of his I've seen were against men who I wouldn't pick to beat good junior middleweights. Not sure what I can take away from these films.
     
  6. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,901
    7,643
    Mar 17, 2010
    There is 30 minutes of Burns vs. Moir.
    If you say there isn't enough footage for you to know what technique Burns lacks, then how do you know that fighters like Burns are unevolved in the first place?

    For all the huffing and puffing about the evolution of the sport, you can't explain to us a single concrete example of what technique Burns would've learned today, that would take him from unevolved to evolved?
     
  7. Pat M

    Pat M Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,707
    4,276
    Jun 20, 2017
    A sport will always see the participants with the same objectives and the athletes will learn how to accomplish the gross motor skills necessary to play the sport. You can call it evolution or you can call it a variance of technique, but there are nuances to the gross motor skill that will make that skill more effective. I'll try to explain what I mean with the following example (admittedly not perfect), concerning slipping, ducking, and parrying a punch.

    Two people can start boxing (before Youtube), one with no trainer, one with the best trainer in the world. If both spar enough they'll both learn to slip punches and roll under punches and parry punches. That will come with self preservation. The difference is in how they will do it.

    The self trained guy probably won't place his feet correctly to maintain balance and be able to fire punches back after he slips, rolls, or parrys a punch. He won't know how to rotate his body and hips while avoiding the punch and leverage more power with his punch after the other person misses. The self trained guy will reach out to parry punches, the well trained guy will parry punches while keeping his hands close to his body. The self trained guy will likely look at the floor when he rolls under a punch, he'll likely slip a punch by a foot when a fraction of an inch is all that is necessary, etc. So, they'll all slip, roll, and parry, one will just do it better and more effectively. Whether you call it evolution or variance is semantics.

    Saying there has been no changes in boxing is like saying there have been no changes in football or basketball Old football players ran with the football and blocked and tackled and basketball players dribbled the ball, shot the ball, and rebounded. The general idea is the same in all sports, but there are ways to do those basic skills that are more effective.
     
    mrkoolkevin likes this.
  8. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,901
    7,643
    Mar 17, 2010

    Do you realize that basketball and football are highly abstract compared to boxing, and are essentially tiny little startups compared to boxing? You're talking about 100 year old sports versus an activity that was practiced in a similar enough fashion since the ancient olympics, and the BC days. And is probably a natural human activity.

    What that means is that these burgeoning sports with highly stylized rules will evolve and change far quicker than an instinctive sport that has been around before King Tut. Pass interference in football was a big change, and made a massive difference to the passing game.

    The jump shot seems to be an actual move you can trace the origins of. I bet the same goes for the 360 dunk. People try to make these parallels in boxing but the pattern doesn't fit. And we at this forum have pretty much proven that for the most part by exposing age old fallacies about supposed evolution in the jab, combos, defense, etc.

    Robert Edgren (?) wrote an article in the 1930's about how John L Sullivan defied the commonly used bob and weave tactics of his predecessors in favor of an upright slugging style. And how Dempsey brought that back. These kinds of accounts are met with eye rolling because we come from a different sports culture of Basketball Football and Soccer where this kind of history doesn't exist. You don't read about great basketball legends of the last era in 1910 news articles. Or about how so-and-so was draining three pointers with incredible accuracy in 1795.

    Naturally our skepticism of the boxers in the past intensifies because the "real" sports of today don't reflect that long rich history. It in fact focuses on the opposite, the evolution, because that's exactly the level of change a brand new super popular sport should be expected to undergo.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2017
    SHADAPBLAD likes this.
  9. Unforgiven

    Unforgiven VIP Member banned Full Member

    58,747
    21,593
    Nov 24, 2005
    I'd have to watch about 5,000 fights from Tommy Burns era to follow up on this claim though.
     
  10. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,901
    7,643
    Mar 17, 2010
    To address the first point, stylistic variance and evolutionary skills are not the same thing. There is a difference you should be able to demonstrate.

    If this isn't an easy thing for you guys to do, then why is it so easy to call someone like Burns unevolved? If you can't point to how come, then how do you know?
     
  11. Pat M

    Pat M Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,707
    4,276
    Jun 20, 2017
    Pass interference is a rule change, not a technique. The 360 dunk has not affected the game, if it done all all in a game it is done when a player is alone and it's done in place of a layup which is just as high percentage.

    I don't think you understand the difference between correct technique and bad technique. Maybe you'll be happier if you never learn. You'll always be able to look at Max Baer and Tony Galento and see what you want to see.

    *I never made any comment about Burns being "unevolved."
     
    mrkoolkevin likes this.
  12. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,901
    7,643
    Mar 17, 2010
    Of course they indirectly affected techniques, the simplest example being learning how to jostle with a DB for a ball. If those examples don't jive, do you not agree that there are indeed evolved techniques in that sport?

    If not, you are telling us that boxing technique has evolved while football technique hasn't? If you are, I would love to hear that argument.

    If you aren't, then you are being a stickler. Which is the quality of thinking expected from someone who just spoiled a quality discussion by being a dumb asshat.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2017
  13. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,901
    7,643
    Mar 17, 2010
    By the way. Nobody waxes poetic about the Ali like skills of Galento. We argue that his abilities were adequate to win boxing matches on the world stage competitive level. And that his abilities are not vulnerable to any supposed evolutionary change in boxing technique.

    The overused straw man is a lazy cop out for an argument that seemingly cannot be substantiated in the example of this thread.
     
  14. mrkoolkevin

    mrkoolkevin Never wrestle with pigs or argue with fools Full Member

    18,440
    9,605
    Jan 30, 2014
    You're being ridiculous. I was trying to give Burns the benefit of the doubt and not read too much into the technique he used against someone like Gunner Moir, a man who was knocked out numerous times (and far more quickly!) by lesser fighters.
     
  15. Pat M

    Pat M Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,707
    4,276
    Jun 20, 2017
    I think all sports have evolved, why would they just stay the same?