Charley Burley vs. Harold Johnson

There's little reason to think that Burley would be able to beat somebody as big and as good as Johnson.

 

The last three Burley specific fantasy match up threads have been Johnson, Gibbons and Hearns, I picked against Burley in all of them.

 

Just pointing out - no need for the :admin because I pick against Burley more often than not.

Your other point is valid though - they are obvious choices! But why do people insist on putting Burley in with ATG LHW's? It's both becuase he's misunderstood as a fighter and because he is capable of great achievments in boxing outside of his natural weight class.

Burley's a blind spot for you, not for me my friend. The Ring rating was lower than mine but better than yours.

 

Well he beat better fighters and made a much bigger impression on the people who saw him fight. He was also ducked by two of the very best fighters in history in Robinson and Armstrong. I wouldn't suggest bumping him nine places on your list because of this last, but it is interesting.

The thing is, you are right. Burley might be becoming overated. But you underate him.

 

Let's hear about the uncrowned champs who were better than him.

This is not unreasonable, though I think you are stronging it a bit. Never forget this though - Burley was out for nearly a year because of management issues, then retired, quite literally, to be a garbage man because he could not make boxing pay. He literally could not make it pay. Not because he was not good enough, as you know.

Let's say he lost out on two-three years, plus Robinson, Armstrong and any other top Welter/Middle through no fault of his own. You postulate that he would have lost all of these fights? You think he was dodged because he was a dead cert as a loser?

Williams is the most underated fighter in boxing for me. He was a great, great fighter. I pick him to beat Cokes. I'd happily put him in with almost anyone and expect competition. Anyway around the weight of course. I think Williams was a better fighter than Rodriguez, never mind Cokes. I think Williams was up there with Griffith, boys like that.

I think this is not a serious question, but I will answer it anyway. The Moore that Burley fought had already beaten Chase, Wade, Hogue and had also been in with Booker twice (the second best fighter Moore fought, according to the man himself) including the draw.

In the year immediatly after, he stopped Williams, and stopped or UD'd Marshall (i forget which way around the fights happened). He still had losses ahead of him, but they were (IMO)always agaisnt ATG fighters, Charles, Bivins, Williams.

I don't think you can have it both ways - I don't think you can have the Moore that Charles beat in early 1946 as an ATG and the Moore that Burley beat in early 1944 as inferior to Giambra. He experienced losses after both fights, and beat cracking fighters before both fights. That's just Archie Moore as far as I can see.

As closely as Rodriguez? Of course, what kind of question is that? That's assuming Griffith would have been allowed to fight him, of course.

Well Shorty Hogue is a difficult difficult fighter, all those Calafornia black dynamite fighters are. But face value? Hogue has wins over Booker, Marshall and Archie Moore. He's 50-60 wins against 10-12 losses with 7-8 of those losses coming in the last year of his career - and he was in good company. So I think your raise might be a little stronger than the cards you are holding.