How is Charley Burley rated?

Robinson ducking him is a bit of a myth. I would say it’s fair to put Burley among the best two or three guys who never won a title. His skills are there to see on the only available fill of him as are all the testimonies from such folks as Archie Moore and Eddie Futch. Resume was outstanding. I would say he could rate anywhere within the top 15-25 fighters of all-time.

 

An elite All-time great, easily top 20. At the Sametime somewhat of a mystery because we didn't see him get the opportunity to face the champions at that time.
For all we know he might have been the greatest boxer who ever laced them up. On an even playing field. The man worked all day, got a call, jumped on a bus to LA and whipped Archie Moore on 0 notice. Knocked Archie down and won over 10 rounds.
Moore said that Burley was the best fighter he ever faced which covers alot of ground.

 

You know, the longer you watch boxing, the more guys you hear about who were supposedly "so amazing" yet they never won anything.

If you step back, there are guys like that "really" every decade.

Someone is supposed to be great and doesn't fulfill his potential. Someone who looks great when he works with everyone else but it doesn't quite translate to actual fights. Maybe the timing isn't right in terms of who the champs are at the time or the circumstances don't fall in his favor. Maybe a catastrophe struck. An injury occurred. A world war broke out.

Everyone has a reason for why they didn't reach their potential.

Charley Burley had roughly a 100 pro fights. He beat some fighters who became "names" later and former champs. He knocked out about half his opponents, which is good but not great. He was, by all accounts, a very good fighter. A rated contender. He was respected by knowledgeable people.

That said, there have been a lot of very good fighters and quality contenders in every era throughout boxing history.

Fans often try to "hype" guys like that up saying he's the "best who never won" a belt and things like that. They comment on "this famous fighter said this about him" or "this trainer said this."

But a lot of famous fighters will "talk up" a fighter who gave them a hard night or beat them on the way up, and we scratch our heads when we hear the name and go, "Really? I saw that guy. He didn't look that awesome to me."

Some fans post breakdowns of the little footage there is and "marvel" at stuff Burley does that, if we're being honest, hundreds of other fighters do just as well.

Truthfully, after a 100 fights and a career that spans more than a decade, there aren't a lot of places to hide.

It may sound callous, but, after a 100 fights and 13 years as a pro, if you didn't become a champ, maybe there WAS a conspiracy to keep you down ... or MAYBE there just wasn't.

Maybe, you never became champ because you weren't good enough to become one at the time. Maybe you should've been more dominant. Maybe if you would've won a fight here or there that you actually lost, things would've been different.

It's not like people wouldn't fight him. He fought plenty of guys. He just wasn't very dominant. He'd win. He'd lose. He'd win. He'd lose. Burley lost a fight nearly every year he was a pro. So did a lot of guys back then.

He wasn't selling out stadiums. Fans weren't waiting in long lines to buy tickets to Charley Burley fights. Champions at the time weren't being "trashed" for not facing him.

There have been a lot of questionable fighters who won welterweight, junior middleweight and middleweight titles, and even more who lost title challenges over the years. Some of the worst of them beat Hall of Famers, too.

I'm sure Charley Burley was better than many of them. He was named to the boxing Hall of Fame. A lot of top contenders are in there. A lot more will be, too.

As far as him being one of the top 25 fighters in boxing history, that's where it goes WAY TOO FAR for me. That's hipster talk.

If Burley is one of the top 25 fighters ever, why isn't Eddie Booker, too? He knocked out Archie Moore a couple months before Burley outpointed him. Booker fought Moore three times, knocked him out and never lost to him. The answer is because Booker doesn't have the "hipsters" fawning over him. And the truth is, neither of them were.

If Michael Moorer gets in the Hall of Fame (he's on the ballot), I'm sure one day David Tua will be. And old time Tua fans will say Tua knocked out four guys who were heavyweight champions - Moorer, Rahman, Maskaev and Ruiz. And that will all be true. And some newer fans may watch the films and be wowed by his KOs. And some will say he was one of the best who never won a heavyweight title.

But nobody should say Tua was one of the top 25 fighters of all time or even that he was one of the top 25 heavyweights of all time. He wasn't.

People don't need to make THAT HUGE JUMP ... like they do with Burley.

Just say Burley was a top fighter, and a top contender and the veterans respected him and he's a hall of famer. That's plenty.

Because, the rest is all hyperbole.

 

I heard Robert Mitchum, the tough guy actor, tell a story about sparring with Burley.
After kicking Mitchums' ass, Burley told him, "that's REAL boxing, not ACTING boxing".

 

Moore: " Burley was as slick as lard, and twice as greasy " nuff said.
stay safe guys.

 

From what I've heard he's one of the best ever. Great lateral movement and jab. Very hard to hit clean and he has a very frustrating style for his opposition

 

That is a VERY good post.

If I could say something to defend Burley's case I would say that back then it was not that "easy" to become a champion. There were not so many belts around and it could happen that a very good or even excellent boxer wouldn't become champion because there was a guy who just happened to be even better.

Maybe that was the case with Burley, maybe in any other era Burley would have become champion. But I don't know enough to give an opinion on the matter.

What I know is that nowadays the meaning of being a champion has been diluted with the alphabet soup of boxing organizations. It seems like we are living in the "no fighter left behind" and "everybody is a winner" era. I see some tittle holders who in any other time would be fringe contenders at the best...

So, who knows maybe Burley would be considered an ATG in this era…

 

I may or may not agree with it all but it is a terrific post. Well done.

 

Where did you hear Mitchum tell the story? I'd like to hear it too!

 

He was on a talk show; maybe Dick Cavett. I know I saw it on youtube.

 

Thank you. I did a search on youtube (and google) and it didn't show, so I'll try looking for the interview.

 

Here is the story:
https://tss.ib.tv/boxing/featured-b...videos-rankings-and-results/22257-big-bad-bob

 

Yeah I mean, Burley grew up in a time where White Champions drew the color line and racism existed everywhere. For Dubblechin to act like the elephant in the room doesn't exist, is disingenuous on his part.

 

This content is protected

Look at his amazing defense and skills.