View Full Version : Charley Burley at welterweight


Welsh Jon
11-30-2011, 10:02 AM
A lot of people rate Charley Burley as a top 10. welterweight, The Ring Magazine have him ranked as high as number 4, above even the likes of Sugar Ray Leonard.

I was just wondering why this is? I can see why he's ranked so highly at middleweight, but his welterweight resume doesn't look all that great.

I'm not studied Burley's career in all that much depth so was just wondering if anyone could explain.

Barn
11-30-2011, 10:18 AM
1.Sugar Ray Robinson
Henry Armstrong
Kid Gavilan
Charley Burley
Sugar Ray Leonard
Carmen Basilio
Jose Napoles
Tommy Ryan
Joe Walcott
Emile Griffith
Thomas Hearns
Mickey Walker
Jack Britton
Ted (Kid) Lewis
Barney Ross
Jimmy McLarnin
Luis Manuel Rodriguez
Billy Graham
Pernell Whitaker
Roberto Duran

Was the rings latest, did you mean SRL?

Anyways I agree, he did beat Zivic and Cocoa kid at that weight but, i don't think that deserves a Top 5 ranking.

However I'm not well versed on him.

NChristo
11-30-2011, 10:21 AM
Welterweight was his best / prime weight, I don't know if the ring take his achievements from other weights and put him there because of that ?, I certainly wouldn't be able to find any room for him in a top 10 at Welter though.

New England
11-30-2011, 10:24 AM
A lot of people rate Charley Burley as a top 10. welterweight, The Ring Magazine have him ranked as high as number 4, above even the likes of Sugar Ray Robinson.

I was just wondering why this is? I can see why he's ranked so highly at middleweight, but his welterweight resume doesn't look all that great.

I'm not studied Burley's career in all that much depth so was just wondering if anyone could explain.

four is a bit lofty perhaps
and there's no way in hell he was a better WW than ray robinson (though the legend holds that robinson wanted no part of burley, it probably had a lot to do with money.)

burley had trouble finding fights at all weights but he had the most at WW. so while his resume might not stack up against some of the best at WW, he gets some (perhaps too much,) credit for being the most avoided WW of all time.

to the extent that i know, there is no film of his work at WW but he was reported to be a very special fighter at the weight
eddie futch said he was the most complete fighter he ever saw.

he was a now you see me now you dont boxer with a very hard punch and a granite chin (never stopped in almost 100 fights)
very good defense. very hard to hit. very effective counterpuncher.

really not a guy you want to fight unless the money is terrific, which unfortunately it never was.

burley is certainly an ATG, but in a stacked division like WW it's hard to put a number on his "ranking"

The Surgeon
11-30-2011, 10:33 AM
I did a thread a while back on the best WW's ever and he made my top 5, i base it on the fact that he fought there during his peak years alot, id call his best years around 1939-1942 and during that time he fought 12 times out of 27 at WW. He beat Holman Williams there, had the split decision loss with Zivic (who beat Armstrong) and that was twice avenged. I rate the guy and have no problem with that ranking though its obviously debatable

Welsh Jon
11-30-2011, 11:13 AM
1.Sugar Ray Robinson
Henry Armstrong
Kid Gavilan
Charley Burley
Sugar Ray Leonard
Carmen Basilio
Jose Napoles
Tommy Ryan
Joe Walcott
Emile Griffith
Thomas Hearns
Mickey Walker
Jack Britton
Ted (Kid) Lewis
Barney Ross
Jimmy McLarnin
Luis Manuel Rodriguez
Billy Graham
Pernell Whitaker
Roberto Duran

Was the rings latest, did you mean SRL?

Anyways I agree, he did beat Zivic and Cocoa kid at that weight but, i don't think that deserves a Top 5 ranking.

However I'm not well versed on him.


Yeah sorry meant SRL. Need to edit that.

Barn
11-30-2011, 11:17 AM
I did a thread a while back on the best WW's ever and he made my top 5, i base it on the fact that he fought there during his peak years alot, id call his best years around 1939-1942 and during that time he fought 12 times out of 27 at WW. He beat Holman Williams there, had the split decision loss with Zivic (who beat Armstrong) and that was twice avenged. I rate the guy and have no problem with that ranking though its obviously debatable
Yeah forgot about Williams but, IMO he is a better MW than WW.

IronDanHamza
11-30-2011, 11:48 AM
Fritzie Zivic x2
Cocoa Kid
And Holman Williams

Is a pretty strong 4 signature wins at a single weight.

He beat other good fighters there too.

May not justify a ranking over Ray Leonard and such. But it gets him into the Top 10. Despite having a better MW.

I imagine their reasoning will be a lot down to H2H ability and skills aswell.

Welsh Jon
11-30-2011, 12:40 PM
Fritzie Zivic x2
Cocoa Kid
And Holman Williams

Is a pretty strong 4 signature wins at a single weight.

He beat other good fighters there too.

May not justify a ranking over Ray Leonard and such. But it gets him into the Top 10. Despite having a better MW.

I imagine their reasoning will be a lot down to H2H ability and skills aswell.

I agree he's got a good welter resume, and he could easily break into a top 10 list, just don't see him as a top 5 welterweight. In terms of welterweight resume there's no way he's ahead of the likes of SRL, Emile Griffith and Jose Napoles.

I guess h2h ability could push him into the number 4 spot, though SRL, Griffith and Napoles were so good you'd have to be very confident of Burley's skills to push them down any welterweight list.

IronDanHamza
11-30-2011, 02:27 PM
I agree he's got a good welter resume, and he could easily break into a top 10 list, just don't see him as a top 5 welterweight. In terms of welterweight resume there's no way he's ahead of the likes of SRL, Emile Griffith and Jose Napoles.

I guess h2h ability could push him into the number 4 spot, though SRL, Griffith and Napoles were so good you'd have to be very confident of Burley's skills to push them down any welterweight list.

I don't have him in my personal Top 10 at WW.

Like others I rank him at MW, despite his prime being at WW. Simply because he did more there.

But I'd say he certainly has an argument for Top 10 at WW.

1.Sugar Ray Robinson
2.Henry Armstrong
3.Ray Leonard
4.Joe Walcott
5.Kid Gavilan
6.Emile Griffith
7.Jimmy Mclarnin
8.Barney Ross
9.Jose Napoles
10.Tommy Hearns

That'a my personal WW list. Who could he replace? Tommy Hearns maybe?

NChristo
11-30-2011, 04:03 PM
I don't have him in my personal Top 10 at WW.

Like others I rank him at MW, despite his prime being at WW. Simply because he did more there.

But I'd say he certainly has an argument for Top 10 at WW.

1.Sugar Ray Robinson
2.Henry Armstrong
3.Ray Leonard
4.Joe Walcott
5.Kid Gavilan
6.Emile Griffith
7.Jimmy Mclarnin
8.Barney Ross
9.Jose Napoles (:nonono:)
10.Tommy Hearns

That'a my personal WW list. Who could he replace? Tommy Hearns maybe?

If Hearns wasn't there then he would still have Jack Britton, Luis Rodriguez, Mickey Walker and Basilio to contend with, I don't think I could make room for Burley in a top 10 WW list at all.

The Surgeon
11-30-2011, 04:09 PM
If Hearns wasn't there then he would still have Jack Britton, Luis Rodriguez, Mickey Walker and Basilio to contend with, I don't think I could make room for Burley in a top 10 WW list at all.

Once u get to the level of greatness these fella's operate at then its almost just down to personal preference, real hard to split them. But as i said i rate Burley as a WW, H2H being a factor for me also

BTW i hope this isnt a stupid question but who is that in ur avvy?

IronDanHamza
11-30-2011, 04:25 PM
If Hearns wasn't there then he would still have Jack Britton, Luis Rodriguez, Mickey Walker and Basilio to contend with, I don't think I could make room for Burley in a top 10 WW list at all.

I was waiting for your comment on Napoles :lol1:

I love Napoles I think he's a great fighter and great to watch but I personally feel he's a little overrated.

Not hugely. Just in terms of being a Top 3-5 WW. I don't see that, personally.

As you see Charley Burley isn't in my list but a fighter of his calibur and in regards to his optimal weight I just think there has to be an argument.

NChristo
11-30-2011, 04:26 PM
Once u get to the level of greatness these fella's operate at then its almost just down to personal preference, real hard to split them. But as i said i rate Burley as a WW, H2H being a factor for me also

BTW i hope this isnt a stupid question but who is that in ur avvy?

But there's no footage of him at WW to make a good H2H analysis.

It's Angelos Epithemiou / Renton Skinner

IronDanHamza
11-30-2011, 04:29 PM
Once u get to the level of greatness these fella's operate at then its almost just down to personal preference, real hard to split them. But as i said i rate Burley as a WW, H2H being a factor for me also

BTW i hope this isnt a stupid question but who is that in ur avvy?

I have no idea who it is but I was watching "Soccer AM best bits" (for some reason) the other day and he was on it.

Think he's some sort of Comedian.

IronDanHamza
11-30-2011, 04:32 PM
But there's no footage of him at WW to make a good H2H analysis.

It's Angelos Epithemiou / Renton Skinner

I think it's one of those 'safe to say he was pretty f*cking amazing" moments.

I.e Robinson at WW.

Despite the lack of footage of his WW career it's safe to say by the footage we do have of him that he'll be pretty incredible in his prime.

You know what I mean?

NChristo
11-30-2011, 07:37 PM
I have no idea who it is but I was watching "Soccer AM best bits" (for some reason) the other day and he was on it.

Think he's some sort of Comedian.
He's known mainly from Shooting Stars but he's gonna get his own show starting on bbc and he's brought a dvd out just recently

I think it's one of those 'safe to say he was pretty f*cking amazing" moments.

I.e Robinson at WW.

Despite the lack of footage of his WW career it's safe to say by the footage we do have of him that he'll be pretty incredible in his prime.

You know what I mean?

Nope.

Too make an accurate H2H analysis don't you need to know the boxer's strengths and weaknesses, how he deal with different styles, was he fast, physically strong, stamina, what was his defense and offense like etc etc etc, articles and resume help make an idea of all these things and how good he was but it's still not enough to make it accurate.
E.g if we put him prime for prime against Gavilan ultimately we'd have no idea how it would go down.
There's quite a bit of Robinson footage at Welter and I'd like more then one of Burley's fights before making him some super power in the H2H department which he 'potentially' could be.

I was waiting for your comment on Napoles

I love Napoles I think he's a great fighter and great to watch but I personally feel he's a little overrated.

Not hugely. Just in terms of being a Top 3-5 WW. I don't see that, personally.
No comment, have a bias for Napoles and I'd rather not start debating on him :lol1:. <He's undeniably top 5 you cunt !>

IronDanHamza
11-30-2011, 11:53 PM
Nope.

Too make an accurate H2H analysis don't you need to know the boxer's strengths and weaknesses, how he deal with different styles, was he fast, physically strong, stamina, what was his defense and offense like etc etc etc, articles and resume help make an idea of all these things and how good he was but it's still not enough to make it accurate.
E.g if we put him prime for prime against Gavilan ultimately we'd have no idea how it would go down.
There's quite a bit of Robinson footage at Welter and I'd like more then one of Burley's fights before making him some super power in the H2H department which he 'potentially' could be.

Then we see things a little differently in that regard.


No comment, have a bias for Napoles and I'd rather not start debating on him :lol1:. <He's undeniably top 5 you cunt !>

:rofl: :rofl: I didn't even see that last notion until the reply.

I understand. I'd be the same in a similar situation.

I'd say he has an argument for #5. No higher, IMO.

Unless someone were to base their ranking heavily on H2H and pure skills and ability. Then he's definitely Top 5, IMO.