Why is Burley ranked so high?

Well maybe just maybe u might wanna be impressed with
in order
Archie Moores corner man Hiawatha Knight, who went back to the day of Joe Gans
Archie Moore
Eddie Futch
Referring to Burley as the greatest they ever saw

 

Well, Burley obviously was great but I think he is slightly overated on here. There were even some fighers of his day who were his equal. and overall I think you fing 15-25 sighers that should rank over him. Personally I don't see him in the Top10.

 

He was the best of the Row IMO, but not by a large margin. Bivins was a naturally larger fighter, as was Marshall (which was by all accounts a very close fight, by the way). Hardly damning losses, especially considering that he was the most consistent performer of the group. Particularly in regards to the Row's meetings with one another. His resume may not be quite as stacked, but the quality is there without question. Combine that with the opinions of other Row members regarding his talents, and I think it's pretty clear.

I used to think he was semi overrated for the reasons mentioned. No longer is that the case.

 

Not really, they won three fights apiece against each other, and Williams won the first and last fights of the series despite being the older of the two.

That depends on which reports you read.

Bivins was only an inexperienced MW when they fought, and he wasn't "expected" to beat Burley at all.

Yes he was; he just had many more fights against the best, so he correspondingly had more losses.

Burley's resume doesn't come close to Bivins' or Marshall's, but here you're arguing that he should rate over them.

 

I've just seen this thread oddly. I've been showing my family the analyzing genius vids all day. This is always one of my fave topics, most has been discussed aready though.

Burley is undeniable imo.

 

I've normally always had Bivins as my number one of that Row, and then Burley. But Burley is the one i've thought of as the best, he was naturally smaller and therefore considering the context of his career deserves to be rated above the others in a pound for pound sense.

 

1. If you actually read Mcgrains posts and the newspaper reports you'd see Burley came off better than Williams

2. An SD means its close as does people saying it was a robbery. The fact Burley had a bad hand, was smaller and Burley did better against many commons opponents are also key factors in rating him over Marshall

3. Bivins was technically a LHW then, had a weight advantage and was a great fighter in his own right

4. No, now your just being your ignorant Burley fought more top rated fighters if anything, Bivins just didnt perform against the top fighters at LHW/HW aswell as Burley did from WW/MW, its undisputable

5. If anything Burleys resume is better than Marshall/Bivins, but you obviously havent studied it enough to know. Both Marhsall/Bivins had losses against inferior opponents

 

Panel,a question nags me all the time...It is this.We all know Ray Robinson is acknoweged as the finest fighter of his time,as I who saw him ringside in his prime,agree upon...We all know Robinson wisely avoided many many top fighters in his weight class,such as Burley, Williams,Eddie Booker, Bert Lytell,LLoyd Marshall,etc,let alone Light heavies,as Archie Moore, Ezzard Charles,Jimmy Bivins,etc. Robinson knew his limitations...Harry Greb in his great career,was the antithises, of Robinson,because he tackled the great bigger men,such as Tunney, Gibbons,Jack Dillon,Tommy Loughran,Gunboat Smith, Big Bill Brennan,and a host of 15 to 50 pound HEAVIER top fighters, some NUMEROUS TIMES, and LICKED them all...Greb AVOIDED NO ONE,large or small,black or white...He FEARED NO ONE...I know Greb would have certainly beaten any of Ray Robinson's foes, but am equally assured Robinson, could not have fared as well against A bigger Tunney, Gibbons, Dillon, Loughran,Rosenbloom, Gunboat Smith, Big Bill Brennan etc..So my question is this...Why would Ray Robinson ,withHIS backround ever be placed,best P4P, ahead of Harry Greb? I'm bewildered......

 

We read you loud and clear, Burt. But what does this have to do with the thread?

 

No, we'd need to see the fights themselves to know that for sure.

Not if there are others who say they thought Marshall won clearly. The only way to know what actually happened in that fight is to watch it for ourselves.

No, he was technically a MW as he only weighed 160 for the fight and was rated at MW.

Ring Rankings at 160 for the end of 1940:

Title Vacant
1. Ken Overlin
2. Tony Zale
3. Billy Soose
4. Archie Moore
5. Steve Belloise
6. Jimmy Bivins
7. Al Hostak
8. Georgie Abrams
9. Tami Mauriello
10. Ernie Vigh

Number of fights against Ring rated fighters (as reported by The Boxing Register):
Bivins - 48
Burley - 32

Number of fights against former/future titleholders:
Bivins - more than 20
Burley - 7

Number of fights against reigning titleholders:
Bivins - 1
Burley - 0

Number of fights against Charles & Moore specifically:
Bivins - 10 (beat both and KO'd Moore)
Burley - 3 (only beat Moore on points)

As usual, you're just pulling **** out of your ass and acting like a total ***** about it.

Oh, it's "undisputable"?

Bivins was simultaneously the #1 contender at both LHW and HW, decisively beat the reigning champ at LHW, and was the #1 HW contender for about 2 or 3 straight years. Show me where Burley equaled or surpassed that as WW/MW. Go on, I'll wait.

If I haven't studied it, explain how I just schooled your lying ass on it?

So does Burley, so what's your point?

 

We don't know who Robinson "avoided" and he seldom if ever shared a weight class with most of those fighters.

 

Because of the thread,"why Burley is rated so high"? The answer is so obvious...He was so good,during Ray Robinson reign, that we know Robinson AVOIDED him for whatever reason at that time.Therefore Robby's not giving Charley Burley,a well deserved shot at Robinson's title,contrasted with Greb's,taking on EVERYBODY...Sorry I veered off the thread...B.B.

 

Burley was never a contender for either of Robinson's titles. He was campaigning at MW when Robby won the WW title and was retired when Robby won the MW title.

 

True what you state about title fights but nonetheless Robinson fought many less contemporaries.of Burley, weighing about the same weight of Burley.I do remember at that timewhen Robby was at his zenith,Burleys name was known and feared...Robinson did not fight Burley not because Burley bwas too big, but he was too dangerous to tamper with...Robinson was no fool. He knew better to take that chance..Could'nt blame him...

 

I don think Robinson was feared but that Burley was too much high risk-low reward. Burley was known and feared but he was not a fighter the people wanted to watch. And even if Robinson would have won, it was hard to look good against Burley. Why risk your reputation when it wouldn't do much for you? I would have liked Robinson to fight Burley and I kind a hold it against him that he didn't but it's excused for a large part I think.