From what little I know about Burn s, a couple of his title challengers were hardly GOAT s, but which of them was the absolute pits? This is directed to those posters on here that know their Burns from their Bums!
Was Jack Palmer any better? In fairness he only held the title for two years. He won it against Hart in 1906, and the same year beat Fireman Flynn, and drew with Jack O'Brien In 1907 he beats Jack O'Brien, Bill Squires and Gunner Moir In 1908 he beat Bill Lang and loses the title to Jack Johnson. I don't think the fact he beat a bunch of guys who in no ways deserved a title shot in the mean time ought to be held against him. He did a better job of meeting title challenges than many early champions, including the likes of Jack Dempsey.
Valid point. He was an active champion, and he earned the right to meet a few stiffs, betwixt legit defenses!
Was Jack Palmer any better? Good question! Not a lot better but he defeated marginally better fighters near their beak eg Williams, Lalor and Taylor plus a creditable draw with Jack Twin Sullivan. Smith had longevity on his side but appears to have improved AFTER the Burns fight. BTW I respect Burns, he beat O'Brien, Hart and Flynn, genuine contenders.
