At middle weight of course. So who takes it? Barkley has that hard, clubbing power here but Turpin was extremely strong too, and akward with it. Both had wins over all time greats , and both are capable of putting on a great fight. 15 rounds.
Turpin beat Robinson while Barkley wouldn`t have stood a chance against Robinson, Turpin was better at slipping shots than Barkley and would have beaten Benn also.
I like Turpin in this. Either by late ko or decision. Turpin was also a tough game guy, he'd have got stuck in at times. Barkley would have kept the audience on the edge throwing those big, hard shots at Turpin.
Good fight without a doubt. Two tall, hard hitting, very tough guys. For me, Turpin has, by some distance, the better all round game. He was ABA Junior and Senior Champion in the same year, 1946 I think, when only 17 years old. That gives an indication of his Boxing fundamentals. He was also a nuclear body puncher. Barkley, of course was born again hard, certainly before money and the party lifestyle put the fire out. His performances against Olajide and Hearns are to savour. At his peak, Iran fought with chilling intensity. I think Randy's big body shots would be the difference here. Barkley would end up having to fight standing still. Even then, I think he'd be on his feet at the end, even if he had to get up. When I was an amateur Boxer, in the early/mid eighties, there were a lot of old boys who hung around the gym, ex pro's from the forties and fifties, many of whom had boxed on bills and shared gyms with the Champions of their day. While the old gym rats would happily talk about big names like Ronnie Clayton, Terry Allen, Sammy McCarthy and the Curvis Brothers, Randy Turpin was always talked about in hushed, reverent tones with head shakes and whistles. He really must have been something.
