Be critical of Tommy Burns

[Mr Mitts]

Figures relating to old purses are seldom reliable. In I908 30,000 was worth 104 million today? I seriously doubt that. Wikipeja gives a factor of 153 times compared to today's currency. Now that is a hella lot less than a factor of 3,466 which was given here. I don't know why people have to bulls hit on something that is already incredible. Never will figure that out.

[Bronson66]

Do u know what you are talking about? There were no breaks back then. seldom did the ref separate fighters. Holding and grappling were part of every day fighting techniques. Watch Corbett instructing Tunney and how to trap the glove while hitting with the other hand as an example.

Holding? Okay to be fair? You're not the only individual to misunderstand this so let me try to clarify something. Pre-classical boxing had two ranges. You were either a stance between you and the opponent with your weight on your back leg, or you were holding. Does that make sense? Watch fights don't believe me.

Hitting and holding in the clinches was mutually agreed upon for this fight.

Burns was not sick he gave public workouts up until two days before the fight.

He did not ask for a postponement and he declared himself to be in the best shape of his life.

Burns never claimed illness as an excuse for his defeat,and all the smoke and mirrors BS by one poster are just so much prevarication and deliberate lies.

Anyone who is interested in this a fight can easily get all the true facts from Pollack's book.

The poster giving out all these lies is not and never has been concerned about the truth,his only objective is to tear down Jack Johnson, for whom he harbours an obsessive hatred that is decidedly creepy!

This poster will produce no primary sources to back up any of the BS he has been compulsively repeating for over a decade,all he posts is just so much verbal sewage.

[Dr Z]

Hitting and holding in the clinches was mutually agreed upon for this fight.

Burns was not sick he gave public workouts up until two days before the fight.

He did not ask for a postponement and he declared himself to be in the best shape of his life.

Burns never claimed illness as an excuse for his defeat,and all the smoke and mirrors BS by one poster are just so much prevarication and deliberate lies.

Anyone who is interested in this a fight can easily get all the true facts from Pollack's book.

The poster giving out all these lies is not and never has been concerned about the truth,his only objective is to tear down Jack Johnson, for whom he harbours an obsessive hatred that is decidedly creepy!

This poster will produce no primary sources to back up any of the BS he has been compulsively repeating for over a decade,all he posts is just so much verbal sewage.

I was talking about other fights Johnson was in. ( hitting and holding ) not the Burns fight. Nothing on hitting the kidneys of Burns? I am not surprised by you omiming that. He fouled Burns more than once.

Burns was ill according to primary sources and looked yellow at ringside. He was at a very low weight for him based on his last 7 previous fights. He was ill. Wikipedia and books say this.

Johnson went low, hit on the break, hit the kidneys, went through the motions with the other guy by not fighting , quit in fights and more. I call that dirty fighting. I have primary sources for these fights too.


You say he was in a pre-arrangement with another super middleweight with Ketchell. Where is your proof?

You love Johnson because he was a freemason cult member like yourself. He was also a wife beater.

This thread is to be critcal of Burns. I did that in other posters in this thread. You have not done so , and are trying to foul this thread with you lies.

Anyone who want to lean about Burns can buy Tommy Burns: Canada's Unknown World Heavyweight Champion


Dan McCaffery


All of the primary soruces and facts are there.


https://books.google.com/books?id=Uh...intosh&f=false

[Bronson66]

Hitting and holding in the clinches was mutually agreed upon for this fight.

Burns was not sick he gave public workouts up until two days before the fight.

He did not ask for a postponement and he declared himself to be in the best shape of his life.

Burns never claimed illness as an excuse for his defeat,and all the smoke and mirrors BS by one poster are just so much prevarication and deliberate lies.

Anyone who is interested in this a fight can easily get all the true facts from Pollack's book.

The poster giving out all these lies is not and never has been concerned about the truth,his only objective is to tear down Jack Johnson, for whom he harbours an obsessive hatred that is decidedly creepy!

This poster will produce no primary sources to back up any of the BS he has been compulsively repeating for over a decade,all he posts is just so much verbal sewage.

One year before the Johnson fight Burns weighed 171lbs against Gunner Moir that is a difference of two and one half pounds from the Johnson fight,and Burns weight for that fight was taken the day before,he may well have weighed more on the day of the fight.

The McCaffrey book on Burns is total rubbish, it includes such BS as ***ey Smith was a South African ***.Smith was born in Spitalfields London and not ***ish neither was he South African in fact he never even fought there.

Anyone wishing to learn about Burns would be well advised to give this comic a wide berth,and instead buy the Pollack bio of Burns.

As I have said, no primary sources will be provided by the HATER and I see no reason to waste more time debating with an illiterate fool.

[Marchegiano]

You have an odd obsession with color lines while trying to inflate the legacies of mediocre fighters. Dempsey himself did not draw the color line. His manager did and for valid reasons. Several states refused to allow it for one thing. Despite that honest attempts at fighting Wills were made by Dempsey. Even Wills himself acknowledged Dempsey never ducked him. There were a lot of politics to navigate, especially after Burns lost his title to Johnson and the ensuing riots.

I have an odd obsession? TF are you talking about Dempsey in my Criticize Burns thread? Bro it's cool but let's not throw mud from our mud huts yeah?


I find it interesting. No different than you apparently finding the life and times of Jack Dempsey so interesting he seems to be the motivator for every post you make that isn't political and/or in lounge.



I like the bits of history passed over. You cam tell me Burns isn't that all you like bud but those of us who have consistently brought source shouldn't speak that way to one another. I'm not going to pretend I have access to super secret but also well documented and verified info you don't, don't pretend you do to me. We all get on the same damn archives. Usually we're sourcing Dempsey or Johnson. Not Burns. So if I want to talk on Burns, TF bro, why give me **** or that while changing focus to Dempsey?




You know we got like a million Dempsey-Wills threads. Leave me to my Burnses and Ganses. They deserve some shine sometimes too.

[Dr Z]

One year before the Johnson fight Burns weighed 171lbs against Gunner Moir that is a difference of two and one half pounds from the Johnson fight,and Burns weight for that fight was taken the day before,he may well have weighed more on the day of the fight.

The McCaffrey book on Burns is total rubbish, it includes such BS as ***ey Smith was a South African ***.Smith was born in Spitalfields London and not ***ish neither was he South African in fact he never even fought there.

Anyone wishing to learn about Burns would be well advised to give this comic a wide berth,and instead buy the Pollack bio of Burns.

As I have said, no primary sources will be provided by the HATER and I see no reason to waste more time debating with an illiterate fool.

You are selective in your sourcing! His next fight after Johson he was 181 lbs, and his six fights before leading up to Josnon he was no less than 174 lbs For Burns he only was 168 lbs. A super middle weight.


https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/010744


I doubt you purchased the McCaffery book. He is an award winning historian. Smith by the way was not his real last name, it was his " boxing " name.


You dismiss all sources you disagee with, and that includes primary sources.


Fouling in a fight he while he was well ahead and going to the kidney's on a 5'7" 168 pound man who was ill, Johnson absolutely did.

[Bronson66]

One year before the Johnson fight Burns weighed 171lbs against Gunner Moir that is a difference of two and one half pounds from the Johnson fight,and Burns weight for that fight was taken the day before,he may well have weighed more on the day of the fight.

The McCaffrey book on Burns is total rubbish, it includes such BS as ***ey Smith was a South African ***.Smith was born in Spitalfields London and not ***ish neither was he South African in fact he never even fought there.

Anyone wishing to learn about Burns would be well advised to give this comic a wide berth,and instead buy the Pollack bio of Burns.

As I have said, no primary sources will be provided by the HATER and I see no reason to waste more time debating with an illiterate fool.

More lies being posted on this thread.This time about the author Dan McCaffrey who has written a total of one book on boxing and not only did he not win any awards for it,he got so many negative reviews about it they were all removed from Amazon where he was hawking it's sale.Three terrible reviews from Boxing 24 alone,one of them mine, were removed.

. Burns weight for his next fight after Johnson should be taken into context,it was nearly a year and a half after he had lost his title and he never again trained with the diligence he had for his defence against Johnson anyone with half a brain would take this into account ,but common sense just ain't that common.

[Marchegiano]

One year before the Johnson fight Burns weighed 171lbs against Gunner Moir that is a difference of two and one half pounds from the Johnson fight,and Burns weight for that fight was taken the day before,he may well have weighed more on the day of the fight.

The McCaffrey book on Burns is total rubbish, it includes such BS as ***ey Smith was a South African ***.Smith was born in Spitalfields London and not ***ish neither was he South African in fact he never even fought there.

Anyone wishing to learn about Burns would be well advised to give this comic a wide berth,and instead buy the Pollack bio of Burns.

As I have said, no primary sources will be provided by the HATER and I see no reason to waste more time debating with an illiterate fool.

Oh?

Like how Nat pretends Sambo Sutton and Young Sambo are the same man?