P4P: Burley and/or Johnson?

**** off. You've got it and I ain't?

****... Well, at least I've still got Williams-Gatica over you :yep

Well, I did. I'd gladly swap if I could, but the computer went mad, sorry. I'd be very grateful if you could upload.

 

In Williams' defence, we haven't seen many knockouts of his. I'm sure that if there were just three more knockouts on film you'd change your mind, and I'd be more confident. As it stands, I say Williams was inconsistent as a puncher but terrific when on form, because of the Jack and Gatica avalanches, and of course, the accounts of many who say he was one of the hardest hitting lightweights ever.
It's like Henry Armstrong. At one time he had one of the most prolific knockout records of all time (27 straight, and 60-1-1 [51]), but because footage shows ****ing none of them, it's natural to overlook his power. Not to say he was a one punch man, but Armstrong may have been one of the most damaging fighters ever and we can't see it.

 

Are you forgetting how Louis teed off on his opposition? Sometimes he put someone away with a single shot, two, or a sudden onslaught. A lot of the time it was two, three, four rounds of sustained punishment. He actively sought the knockout more than Williams, or could have just been more consistent, but like I said, Williams on peak form was one of the greatest punchers ever. How could anyone deny that? Despite the low knockout percentage, which is shady anyway, there is evidence on film and many an account of old timers who thought he was the hardest puncher at lightweight since Lew Jenkins. Okay, he teed off on Jack, but have you seen the short left hooks and uppercuts that punctured Jack's defence and sent him stumbling?

 

Aye fair enough. Like I say I have them all roughly in the same tier.

I dont have a clue how to upload it.

 

Do you realise how petty you're being?

Let me tell you - a lot of people were not that impressed by Burley after the Smith footage first came to light. Nevertheless, they accept he had better showings, and do not judge him solely on his lone decent performance.

With Williams, his best performances aren't even filmed - save for the Beau Jack knockout, which you've posted. That's an iron jawed, genuine Hall of Famer getting the **** knocked out of him - and you want to criticise Williams for it?

Like I said, Williams was a damaging puncher. In the fifth round he didn't land a mass of punches, just a select few - uppercuts and hooks mostly. Fight reports, written by journalists much closer to the action than us, said Jack was visibly worn down by the start of the sixth. Then, Williams opened up with that first string of left hands that cracked open whatever was left and sent Jack stumbling. If we're going to micro analyse everything, analyse the shortness of those punches and the effect they had on a durable fighter.

Bratton, for a start, was a welterweight, and a durable one at that. I actually can't believe though, that you'd criticise Williams' power on the basis that he didn't get the knockout. Bratton was pummeled from post to post by a smaller man, had his jaw broken, and was left helpless.

Perhaps we should criticise the punching prowess of Jack Dempsey for failing to knock out Jess Willard.

The Gatica fight would sway you slightly I believe. If we had the last Bolanos fight, the West knockout, the Montgomery fight and maybe the Larkin murder, you may change your mind entirely.

 

Don't feel obliged if it's too much effort, but back in '05/'06 when we had an uploads thread (before it got taken away) people used to use Megaupload of Yousendit. You basically upload the fight onto there, then I download it from them.

 

I'll give it a go.

 

First off, I don't agree with the Baer-Bratton comparison. You and I both have only seen a few seconds of the Williams-Bratton bout, so neither of us should feel as authorised to comment on that as much as Louis-Baer. But I bet you any money that Bratton put up a much stronger resistance; he was a good welterweight, naturally bigger than Williams, and quite skilled with it, as well as being durable. It seems very rich of you to assume that Williams should have knocked him out - you know as well as I do that boxing is a variable sport more than almost any other.

Okay. Pure punching power. If film doesn't help us much (I wish there was more available) then we'll turn to first hand accounts. Kid Gavilan, welterweight, said Ike Williams was one of the hardest punchers he faced; Carmen Basilio, welterweight, said Williams was the hardest puncher he faced. It's likely that his grudge against Ray Robinson affects this claim, however, Basilio was lifted off his feet by a slowing Williams who was known by then to be far from his youthful best. Both Gavilan and Basilio also fought a lot of middleweights, so if you believe them, it should say something about Williams' power.
Beau Jack on tape said 'Williams was a destroyer. He will destroy you.' Jack, notably tough, seemed deteriorated by the fifth and especially sixth rounds against Williams, who was picking his shots. He was obviously hitting with quite some power.
Sonny Liston also said Williams was the hardest puncher he fought. I think he meant Cleveland Williams, but it still counts.

Back in the day, Williams was known - right then, at the time (as opposed to a manufactured myth spun later down the line, like Monzon being 6ft 2in) for being a titanic puncher. Clearly, he must have scored some devastating knockouts to give this impression, or at least left enough bruises on his distance-lasting opponents to inspire them into believing they were lucky to escape the presence of such power.

I don't think you, probably me too, and most others realise how restricted Williams was as champion and how it might have affected his knockout ratio. It is paltry and doesn't match his reputation. To what extent he was shafted is not known entirely, except by the few people left alive who were closest to him, but Williams was definitely carrying opponents and was at one point on the wrong end of a blackballing, effectively forbidden to box, until he ended up with Blinky Palermo. It was the only move, and still a wrong one.

Not only this, but previous to his championship reign, Williams was being avoided - he was dangerous, and it didn't seem fitting that he should knock out every opponent and scare the rest of them away. Infact, he only got his title shot against Juan Zurita because he was a last minute substitute.
I've also heard the notion go round that Williams sometimes didn't really try. Sounds a bit like Sam Langford.

Lastly I will throw this one out there; Williams' amateur career was successful (having won the featherweight title) but short. I would assume he was still developing as a fighter through the first years of his professional career and was probably not the puncher he later became - same with Joe Louis.

 

If we only had a snippet of Louis-Baer, you know at the end of the first round where Baer comes on strong, Louis evades him, fights back and has him in the corner (landing a lot of punches to no apparent effect other than making Baer cover up) - that would be similar. Louis did go on to end the fight in convincing fashion (although while Louis looked excellent, Baer admitted himself that he could have gotten up for more but didn't want to), but my point is that you can't make a conclusion from just a few seconds of tape.

For all we know, Bratton may have evaded most of Williams' assaults (however, let's not expect him to have been chasing the knockout - he was a good boxer) until the last round or the penultimate one when Williams may have suddenly opened up. Like I said, Bratton had the combination of durability and skill, more skill than that of Baer at least, who seemed to invite Louis unnecessarily.

Many people expected Louis to beat the **** out of Al McCoy, but it was stopped due to an injury. Same with Tony Musto, who wasn't particularly durable, and McCoy was right at the end of his career.

Even if the statistical burden of proof is rooting against me in this case, I'm saying that it can work both ways, and that I would not advocate casting judgement against a fighter's punching power based on such little footage, especially of two fights won via such nasty onslaughts.

You can find clips of Nigel Benn, Sonny Liston and Mike Tyson where they connect over and over to little effect until the referee steps in and halts the fight.

As for Basilio, what would Fullmer stopping him have much to do with it? Again, I'm looking for a parallel - how about Archie Moore twice stopping Bert Whitehurst who would later go the distance with Sonny Liston - twice? Barely in the second one, but still. Basilio more than likely fought a Williams who was slower, less agile and less motivated than in his prime, but who also showed remnants of great power but couldn't capitalise.

There is definitely a degree of uncertainty about Williams, but this is fact - he was notorious among contemporary fighters and observers for his destructive power. One punch power, too. Now I never said he was the hardest hitting lightweight ever, but then I don't think Louis was in the top tier for raw strength in a punch either. Both, to me, were 9/10s in that regard, backed up by accuracy, speed and dynamism on offence.

Williams' record understandably puzzles some, just like the brief footage of Harry Greb is found to be largely uninspiring, but then we have proof to the contrary in both cases. We know that Williams carried opponents - how many and to what extent is not known, but based on his reputation, wrtiers' accounts, and film evidence where he'd open up an opponent like a tin of beans and spill them everywhere, I don't think there's much basis for an opposing argument.

You know yourself that records and ratios aren't everything. As a fan of Dick Tiger I never thought you'd criticise Williams in such a way. I think you're nitpicking over certain bits of footage, and as I said, if any more tapes were to surface of more definitive, fewer punch knockouts then I think you'd change your mind.