Braddock vs Hart

No historians of any era rate Hart highly!

 

I don't need to flip anything.

I was responding to your claim, that Seamus' opinions are "truly extreme and unrealistic". What has he ever posted here, that is as unrealistic as you favouring Tommy Burns to beat Deontay Wilder?

 

It is all very well quoting this in hindsight, but you forget to mention that Burns had beaten nobody at the time.

He could have turned out to be another Audley Harrison.

I made Wilder earn his pick over Burns, who was a known quantity.

That is much more reasonable IMHO, than saying that Jimmy Braddock would have swept everybody before Jack Johnson.

We know exactly what Braddock was and wasn't.

 

Some contemporary observers seem to have thought rather highly of him, but he was forgotten very quickly when he fell from grace.

 

Which ones? Who puts him in the top 30 ?

 

You picked Burns to beat Wilder, when Wilder was more than 5 years and 31 fights into his pro career. Not exactly a beginner. Your pick, even at the time, was beyond strange.

 

Although the gap in physical atributes is enormous, Burns was terrific fighter at his best and he could trouble most of the non-great heavies even after him. Wilder is far from great fighter and his punching power might be a bit negated by short statue of Tommy.

I don't say that Burns would beat Wilder, but it's not that ridiculous to think it's not a given.

 

When I say contemporary observers, I mean that he generated some excitement as a contender.

There were people who thought that he was a special talent.

Obviously he lost to Tommy Burns, rapidly went into the tank, and left behind no film legacy.

This made him very forgettable in retrospect.

 

Who had he beaten at the time?

 

As you say, the physical gap between the two is enormous. For sure, Wilder isn't a technical great fighter - but I refuse to believe Burns can give that much away in height, reach, weight and punching power, to be competitive.

 

No one of any great consequence.. but he had knocked out 31 men in a row, and would be far, far too big and hard-hitting for Burns to have a realistic chance.

 

Sorry - double post.

 

Would you give Burns a chance against Audley Harrison then?