In the Ring With Tommy Burns

By that logic I guess anyone would bad and terribly unskilled against johnson and papke. ( they didn't but...)

Maybe someday well turn up the footage where ketchel struggled against guys like joe thomas, montana sullivan, klaus, or langford. But you go on believing he knocked out everyone he ever met or would have met based on statistics...

 

All I am saying is it's clear based on resumes and common opposition, ketchel is in a league higher than burns both as a fighter and as a puncher.

 

Come to think of it papke had a less impressive record against common opponents as well yet managed to give ketchel hell, stopping him once and many felt beating him in the fourth. Papke was more of a brawler than burns so there goes your theory about two brawlers meeting. Furthermore no one brought up the footage to tout burns ability, it was done to illustrate his style, you obviously missed the point.

 

Would Burns have even beaten Papke? Burns couldn't beat Jack Twin Sullivan

 

That's actually not at all what you said. You said based on common opposition that ketchel would knock burns out in two rounds like hearns did duran. Which pure speculation bordering on fantasy.

 

I saw the point, I just get extremely irritated when i hear certain posters here make ludicrous claims that "Burns was much better than ketchel" "burns was a bigger puncher than ketchel" when the facts don't illustrate those opinions.

 

I said Ketchel would win based on common opposition. I think ketchel would knock burns out early based on styles. Burns would walk right into ketchel, and it would be suicide.

 

Yeah and papke couldn't beat flynn who burns kod. Big deal that doesn't mean didly until papke and burns meet in the ring. Sure id give burns at least an even shot to beat papke. Why not. Is papke unbeatable also just cause he beat ketchel?

 

And as illustrated that isn't supported by anything in either burns record or films of burns. It doesn't matter if you don't respect the opposition burns is fighting in the films. If anything that supports the contention that he was not a brawled.

 

How can you be so concise,so "on the money", in your rebuttal of Suzie's contentions,yet so ,off target and ,aimless , so wide of the mark, and, have so much difficulty comprehending posters contributions when replying to the Jeffries thread? It's as though the two threads you posted in were written by totally different people.:huh
Very Strange.

 

Ketchel definitely knocked Johnson down. You can tell by the way Johnson tries to get up when he first falls down only to fall back to his butt, because he has cob webs. Of course, then Johnson gets up at 3 and goes on to destroy ketchel...but name another 165lb man who could knock down a chizzled 210lb ATG heavyweight champion with 1 right hand?

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Actually it was 205 1/2lbs v 1701/4lbs .
I guess we will never know the truth of it.

Barney Curley said the knockdown was rehearsed in his hotel room the day before the fight,suggestions that Ketchel and Jack pull their punches were met with Stanley's admission that he didnt think he could pull his shots ,according to Curley, Jack said ,"well do your best and I'll pull mine ",or words to that effect,it may all be hyperbole ,who knows?

"Lets be practical Jack.We all know you can murder Ketchel.

I'm not kidding myself.
I wouldnt let him get into the ring with you for a million dollars unless I had your word that you wouldn't hurt him"
Willus Britt to Jack Johnson.

 

I think the film is inconclusive ... without question Fitz and Langford hit much harder.

 

If we had film of Ketchel's KO's of Hugo Kelly, O'Brien, Sullivan brothers and only film of Burns against O'Brien and Johnson we would probably think that Ketchel hit far harder.