Tweet
Originally posted by billeau2
View Post
A lot of the praise for Burley came from Archie Moore. He beat Moore all times I believe... 2 or 3? Here is the quote from Moore:
Archie Moore, the light-heavyweight champion who was defeated by Burley in a 1944 middleweight bout, was one of several fighters who called Burley "the greatest fighter ever."
I mean that is pretty conclusive and coming from a guy who is no Palooka!
Here is some footage: This is an analysis of the footage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81non05aKX4
And we have some of his fight with "Oakland Billy Smith" with no commentary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAUGAjwJgP4
My own feelings about this? The footage is no joke. There is not a lot of it, but damn if Charley's sense of distance, his footwork and his timing are not a rare set of qualities. From many accounts he fought to the level of his competition, but the subtle hints about his skills are like bloody prints on a murder scene they tell us a lot about the guy. Here are some incidentals:
1) The guy is QUICK, really really quick...Not unrefined speed, but there is no telegraph to his punches, and he is relaxed. Burley does not even need to lead with a jab he is so quick on the cross. Remember that the cross is generally a weak punch from a combat perspective because you have to punch across your body, your reach is s h i t, and you have to do something immediately afterwards not to get clobbered! burley never has a problem with it.
2) Defensively Burley makes you look bad. He was described by many as being unhittable. While I do not like to encourage hyperbole, the footage of this fight is convincing regarding this claim. And Burley does it with subtle, small movements, not by ambling across the ring...So he is always cutting the ring off, like a good boxer puncher does.
3) his sense of when to tie up, when to dip versus when to doo...looks like he was breast fed in the square circle. This is a guy who outfoxed Moore badly and it makes sense watching him work.
4) counter punching, when he does use the jab, etc... But that cross of his is lighting in a bottle. When a guy is that good with the cross he can set up the hook easily, he can catch the guy with a jab reversing the order: throwing the jab after the cross as the opponent tries to create distance.
I hate to hype fighters based on limited faculties, but I have to be honest with my own faculties which scream at me that this guy was as good as the legends proclaim. He never fought the comp to put him on those rarafied lists people like, but I would put Burley head to head with some of the best...allegedlly sugar Ray (at least his management) wanted nothing to do with Burley perhaps because they knew how slick he was. I could see Burley fighting a contest with Sugar Ray and making it a very competative fight.
Sugar Ray was quicker in all punches, but Burley has one of the fastest crosses I have ever seen. Defensively Burley might actually carry the advantage, both guys had great feet...Suger had that athletic ability which Burley could not eclipse...for all his abilities Charley was not a particularly athletic fighter. Sugar Ray had the advantage with power of course.
Cedan was not on the level of Burley. Not that I could see. Now some will say that watching Burley fight one fight is nothing much to see. But lets remember that there were fighters who believed that Charlie was literally the best, not only Moore.
For ****s and giggles take out a piece of paper and list the things one can see Burley do in the footage: He parries punches with the gloves, he uses angles with the upper body and torso, footwork with distancing making opponent just miss, all punches thrown, fights at all distances, accurate punching, quick punching, cuts the ring off, counters punches, uses the ring properly, sets traps (with the cross usually)... I guarantee that a thought out list would be an interesting proposition.
Archie Moore, the light-heavyweight champion who was defeated by Burley in a 1944 middleweight bout, was one of several fighters who called Burley "the greatest fighter ever."
I mean that is pretty conclusive and coming from a guy who is no Palooka!
Here is some footage: This is an analysis of the footage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81non05aKX4
And we have some of his fight with "Oakland Billy Smith" with no commentary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAUGAjwJgP4
My own feelings about this? The footage is no joke. There is not a lot of it, but damn if Charley's sense of distance, his footwork and his timing are not a rare set of qualities. From many accounts he fought to the level of his competition, but the subtle hints about his skills are like bloody prints on a murder scene they tell us a lot about the guy. Here are some incidentals:
1) The guy is QUICK, really really quick...Not unrefined speed, but there is no telegraph to his punches, and he is relaxed. Burley does not even need to lead with a jab he is so quick on the cross. Remember that the cross is generally a weak punch from a combat perspective because you have to punch across your body, your reach is s h i t, and you have to do something immediately afterwards not to get clobbered! burley never has a problem with it.
2) Defensively Burley makes you look bad. He was described by many as being unhittable. While I do not like to encourage hyperbole, the footage of this fight is convincing regarding this claim. And Burley does it with subtle, small movements, not by ambling across the ring...So he is always cutting the ring off, like a good boxer puncher does.
3) his sense of when to tie up, when to dip versus when to doo...looks like he was breast fed in the square circle. This is a guy who outfoxed Moore badly and it makes sense watching him work.
4) counter punching, when he does use the jab, etc... But that cross of his is lighting in a bottle. When a guy is that good with the cross he can set up the hook easily, he can catch the guy with a jab reversing the order: throwing the jab after the cross as the opponent tries to create distance.
I hate to hype fighters based on limited faculties, but I have to be honest with my own faculties which scream at me that this guy was as good as the legends proclaim. He never fought the comp to put him on those rarafied lists people like, but I would put Burley head to head with some of the best...allegedlly sugar Ray (at least his management) wanted nothing to do with Burley perhaps because they knew how slick he was. I could see Burley fighting a contest with Sugar Ray and making it a very competative fight.
Sugar Ray was quicker in all punches, but Burley has one of the fastest crosses I have ever seen. Defensively Burley might actually carry the advantage, both guys had great feet...Suger had that athletic ability which Burley could not eclipse...for all his abilities Charley was not a particularly athletic fighter. Sugar Ray had the advantage with power of course.
Cedan was not on the level of Burley. Not that I could see. Now some will say that watching Burley fight one fight is nothing much to see. But lets remember that there were fighters who believed that Charlie was literally the best, not only Moore.
For ****s and giggles take out a piece of paper and list the things one can see Burley do in the footage: He parries punches with the gloves, he uses angles with the upper body and torso, footwork with distancing making opponent just miss, all punches thrown, fights at all distances, accurate punching, quick punching, cuts the ring off, counters punches, uses the ring properly, sets traps (with the cross usually)... I guarantee that a thought out list would be an interesting proposition.
Comment