Tommy Burns as champion. Did he face top ten ranked opponets? How many did he beat?

Great post. I have been saying this for years.

I don’t think many people rate burns highly at all at heavyweight so I think most people will agree with you

 

He fought a lot of challengers in the very short space of time, so I'd say any some ones are forgivable.

Gunner Moir was British champion
Bill Squires was Australian champion
Bill Lang was Australian champion
Jem Roche was Irish champion

Which I think certainly adds some legitmacy.

How complete are some of this time in these countries compared to the US?

 

Great post, would love to see you continue these.

What was the public reaction to Burns fighting these people, especially the 0-1 guy?
Weren't the public accustomed to better matches? Was this kind of matchup seen as acceptable, and why?

 

In some ways he was sweeping up the crumbs left over in the wake of Jeffries title reign.

He ended up breaking the color bar, because there was nothing else left for him to do!

 

He fought two people on the same night. I'd imagine they saw it as closer to an exhibition, probably not much out of the ordinary except it's ended up going down as a title defence.

I doubt his record was really 0-1 too, he probably had some wins, just none that were noteworthy enough. I actually notice his one recorded fight is one a few years earlier with Tommy Burns.

 

Fights Jewey Smith had before facing Burns include these provide by Boxed Ears on an old thread. The one where you tried to tell us Smith was Jewish and the heavyweight Champion of South Africa.Smith never set foot inS/A and was born in Spitalfields and married in a C of E church.
"There are several other fights that are not listed, as you suspected, Doug. In particular, of those that might make his shot moderately justifiable: Tommy "Claymore" Lancaster, Bill Burden, Edward Starlight Rollins, who was rated at the time, Mike Bilton, D ick Parkes, Greg Cox, Andy Joseph, Shiny Eric Dodson, Len Lowe, and Whiffsthorn Peter Jackson. He beat all but Cox, managing a very shady draw but it increased his stock a little bit. "

Boxed Ears, May 6, 2016 Report

 

Okay, that makes sense.
I wish this kind of context was covered more in breakdowns like these.

 

"Burns once defended his title twice in one night, although some historians refuse to accept those wins as title defences, insisting they were exhibition bouts. But in newspapers at the time, they were advertised as heavyweight title fights. If those defences are counted in his record, he successfully defended his title 13 times."

 

To be fair to Burns ,on winning the title he announced he would fight men of all races,colours ,and creeds. At one stage he was prepared to defend against Sam McVey but injured his arm and the fight was put off.
Jim Jeffries publicly criticized him for agreeing to defend against Johnson.

"On December 26, 1908, Jack Johnson defeated Canadian Tommy Burns to win the heavyweight championship. Jeffries publicly criticized Burns for giving Johnson a shot at the title. "The Canadian never will be forgiven by the public for allowing the title of the best physical man in the world to be wrested from his keeping by a member of the African race," Jeffries stated. "I refused time and again to meet Johnson while I was holding the title, even though I knew I could beat him. I would never allow a negro a chance to fight for the world's championship, and I advise all other champions to follow the same course."

From CBZ
Undated -Smith won a number of fights with minor opponents 1908


Mar 21 Mike Crawley London, England KO 3 Apr 4 Seaman Broadbent London, England W 4 Apr 18 Tommy Burns Paris, France LK 5 -Heavyweight Championship of the World

 

Jim O'Brien and Walker were both disposed of on the same night; both in one round. O'Brien had previously gone 10 with Burns, in his only other recorded fight, so I suspect his record was probably incomplete. Given that they had gone 10 previously, the fact that didn't last a single round was probably a bit of a shock. Walker's record is probably incomplete, too...But he was still a journeyman who had been in the ring with the likes of Ryan, Childs and Peter Jackson.

Given that, and the fact that these were essentially part of a barnstorming exhibition (that was promoted as a being for the championship to attract spectators) only about a month after he won the championship, I don't think the affair can really be held against Burns. He was supposed to face former champion Fitzimmons in May of '06, but that fight fell through. Instead, he faced a perfect respectable challenger in Flynn and then a top contender, O'Brien, in consecutive fights in '06 and then '07 after only getting a draw in the first fight.

Then he went on a barnstorming tour and, as Vesti noted, faced several national champions at a point when that carried more significance. Squires went off as a favorite against Burns the first time and hadn't been beaten decisively in his career. That, and the fact that he was Austrailian champion, probabably would have established him as being a reasonable contender, too.

So, Burns made a point of defending against reasonable challengers in every year that reigned. Plus, there were fights against better regarded opponents that he was willing to make and ultimately he wound up facing the best available contender once all was said and done.

Not bad for a reign that lasted less than three years.

 

Roche had several more "unrecorded-by boxrec, that is-fights, not that it made him much better.

 

I know things where very different back then, but Jesus Christ, could Jeffries sound like any more of a douchebag? People still get on Johnson's back for the way he represented himself, but surely some of his actions that are frowned upon are surely an understandable consequence from this kind of moronic racial hate.

 

Not that much worse than the champion that preceded him when you think about it, although taking into account that quality is usually better than quantity he does fall short.

 

Those rankings are debatable, and I'm sure the man who compiled them would admit so.