Would Of Tony Zale Stood A Chance Against Charley Burley?

[GJC]

I'm always a bit hard on Zale for my money he reigned in as deep a pool of MW talent as there has been but has so so many names missing from his resume. I take the war into account but....
To give Zale his credit though even forgetting the Graziano trilogy if you watch the Cerdan fight you are watching a tough man go out on his shield. I'd favour a few fighters in that era over him Burley included but Zale would be a tough fight for any MW in history

[TheGreatA]

Zale wouldn't have had much of a chance post-war. Burley had stayed active while Zale had been out of boxing for years. In 1941, with both men in their primes, I'd still go with Burley. I believe he could nullify most of Zale's offense, while scoring with counters on the relatively easy to hit Zale. Zale was troubled by boxers such as Billy Conn (no shame), Billy Soose, Nate Bolden and Steve Mamaskos.

[IronDanHamza]

This one is tough actually, I am not sure how to judge it without kowing who their common opponents are. I do believe that Zale is underrated a bit in the history section overall and I do think he's a formidable opponent for ANY MW, including Burley and the GOAT SRR. Zale did not always engage in slugfests, Graziano forced him into that. Zale was a good boxer as well and an ATG body puncher which allows him to hit Charley in the most available body-shot, But Tony beware, if you telegraph many of those you will open yourself to Burley's quick accurate, hard hooks and crosses. Burley is a pure boxer with awesome combo's and Zale a vicious counter-puncher.--------------------------------------------------Tony Zale has huge power and one of the greatest ever chins so you can't seriously say that Zale has no chance. I keep seeing that vicious right to Rocky's body and that awesome Left hook coup de gras to the jaw over and over in my mind, man it was beautiful. So underrate Zale at your peril.

I absolutely agree here.

Tony Zale is a Top 100 ATG IMO but the consensus of the section is he isn't.

Something I must say I was suprised about.

In terms of the question?

I think Burley pummels Zale. Burley was one hell of a fighter.

[GJC]

I absolutely agree here.

Tony Zale is a Top 100 ATG IMO but the consensus of the section is he isn't.

Something I must say I was suprised about.

In terms of the question?

I think Burley pummels Zale. Burley was one hell of a fighter.

Like I say I always hold my hand up with Zale as being a grumpy old fossil. Think it is more disappointment at not seeing Zale v La Motta, Burley etc.
Whilst I wouldn't neccessarily put Zale top ten MW it's a he'll of a deep division plus one I have a bias towards. Not attempted a top 100 pfp but ill probably have 40 MWs and one each bantam and fly! Zale top 100 pfp? Might struggle to find 100 better than him.
I hold my hands up to shamefully under rating Charles too btw.

[IronDanHamza]

Like I say I always hold my hand up with Zale as being a grumpy old fossil. Think it is more disappointment at not seeing Zale v La Motta, Burley etc.
Whilst I wouldn't neccessarily put Zale top ten MW it's a he'll of a deep division plus one I have a bias towards. Not attempted a top 100 pfp but ill probably have 40 MWs and one each bantam and fly! Zale top 100 pfp? Might struggle to find 100 better than him.
I hold my hands up to shamefully under rating Charles too btw.

We all have our bias', my man.

Ah man, Middleweight is damn near unfair to rate. Zale wouldn't see my Top 10 either. And I have never even tried to go past 10, atleast with any success and something I can stick to.

Zale was a good fighter though, and although I wouldn't say it's a dead cert I would say he deserves a Top 100 spot. But hey, in all honesty I wouldn't really know where to start when ranking him on an all time level.

How do you rate Charles, then?

[GJC]

We all have our bias', my man.

Ah man, Middleweight is damn near unfair to rate. Zale wouldn't see my Top 10 either. And I have never even tried to go past 10, atleast with any success and something I can stick to.

Zale was a good fighter though, and although I wouldn't say it's a dead cert I would say he deserves a Top 100 spot. But hey, in all honesty I wouldn't really know where to start when ranking him on an all time level.

How do you rate Charles, then?

My problem with Charles was I saw him live against **** Richardson towards the end when he was a shell and obviously struggling health wise and he was awful.
Well when I pay my shilling or whatever it was in the age of dinosaurs I want better value for money so that has given me an irrational bias against Charles. No excuse for it hands up.
Massive Archie Moore fan so for me he was the best Light Heavy but very hard to argue that against Charles.
Big problem for me so I generally ignore the question
I will say the only joy of entering your declining years is people forgive your irrational thoughts and virtually pat you on the head and whisper to others " you know the old fart's mind is going let it go"

[slakka]

Common opponent was Georgie Abrams and Zale did a better number on him than CB

[GJC]

Common opponent was Georgie Abrams and Zale did a better number on him than CB

Triangle theories never really stand up. Welcome to the forums btw, word to the wise triangle theories are never well received either lol