Charley Burley vs. Jose Napoles

I'm making another Burley thread (for the good people of ESB to avoid...:twisted: )

Was watching some fights today, trying to pick up stylistic nuances of fighters today for fun...and was thinking about Burley/Napoles and the problems each would have had with the other stylistically.

Burley, the original stylist, with the antiquated hand positon, and stance versus the another smooth, but pressuring stylist, in his own right, in Napoles...It's hard to fully equate how Burley performs against another fighter his own size, because the only film of him that exists is where he is fighting the larger light heavyweight puncher, Oakland Billy Smith. Would Burley's punch output increase? It's very likely it would...But is it safe to say that he still might not be the most active welter/middle due to his reputation of not exactly being a crowd pleaser? A more defensively oriented fighter from that era?

How does the fight play out? To me Burley with his circular movement and twisting, actually fully commits and explodes by torquing into his punches...a very hard hitter. Some of his punches travel in wider arcs, while some are straight. While being very adept defensively, staying out of an opponent's punching range. Napoles, on the other hand is amazing (especially the Cokes fights) at staying within range, making an opponent miss with unbelievable timing and reflexes, by just fractions, and then capitalizing with flowing combinations, which are hard shots!

I feel Burley is going to find Napoles a very difficult target, those wide looping power punches will not get the job done here (IMO). Watch the films, Napoles has the inate ability to slip fast straight right hands, at a incredibly close range. Burley will also be forced on the defensive with Napoles' punching at mid range...From the footage I've seen, I think Napoles gets off faster, with his shots coming in much tighter, with accuracy, and with good power, it seems he commands the center line with his punching...and that is a very difficult thing to overcome in a fight. With that said though...to me, Burley seems to be a fighter that those advantages Napoles' does possess at mid range (IMO), may be neutralized by Burley maintaining a distance where he can capitalize on his strengthes, in this case, by maintaining a distance where he can dictate the pace and timing of the exchanges, while in turn, minimizing Napoles' opportunities at a closer range, where he seems to be more proficient...this may be accomplished by Burley's leaning back stance, and footwork to maintain that distance, just outside of mid range, where Napoles does excel. thus allowing him to dictate the exchanges more often than not (if he can do it)...and while Napoles is a good puncher, it is Burley who has the better power, remember he actually backs up Oakland Smith in the film! I can't say this enough though, Napoles is brilliant at closing distance and getting into his range, either by initiating or countering depending on an amazing ability to slip punches at close range.

This is the deciding factor in my mind re this great fight...IN your opinion, at what distance is the fight fought at? Who dictates the distance more often? Is there another option(s) that you feel would play a part in the outcome?

So c'mon people don't avoid another Burley thread! Opinons please. Which of these amazing stylists do you favor? There have never been two fighters so unique...We'll never see anything like them again.

 

At least you express an opinion...:good

 

I think Burley has the tools to take the narrow decision win...but as stated earlier, I like Napoles skillset of closing distance by slipping inside, then firing off combinations to give Burley some major trouble stylistically.
A funny thing (or maybe not, depending on your viewpoint) Napoles is considered the better puncher, in The Ring's 100 Greatest Punchers Annual.