Charley Burley

[Poncey]

What is everyone's thoughts on him? Hype or hope?

Also, is it true that only footage to one of his fights exists?

[jayc]

Virtually all the names from his time period said he was an all time great - and he beat some top top fighters. He's probably top 20 p4p of all time in my eyes. Just a shame he never got a shot. Theres a couple of good books about him though.

[harrygreb]

yeh, read the books about burley and you'll get it just about right.
charlie could have got himself a shot but wrong decisions were made by him on the management side, not entirely his fault really....
agree top 20 p4p is where is destined to remain. great fighter.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

yeh, read the books about burley and you'll get it just about right.
charlie could have got himself a shot but wrong decisions were made by him on the management side, not entirely his fault really....
agree top 20 p4p is where is destined to remain. great fighter.

--- Burley something of a mystery man. Went through almost as many managers as he did years in the fight biz.

Ibro puts him 10th all time middle and 19th all time welter. He doesn't appear on their 20 p4p list.

[elmersalsa]

Great fighter of what I have read about him, but I cannot see him in the top 20 pound per pound all-time...No way

He definately belongs in the top 20 all-time great welterweights and middleweights.

[JC]

Just in case anyone hasn't already seen it here's some footage of him vs Billy Smith

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=e4IsZxqeJos

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=-v1Ct2DFR ... re=related

[mhagler91490]

Him and Holman Williams were boxers who never got the chance to make a championship legacy for themselves.

[Robinson]

From what I have seen of Burley ie the Smith fight.
He makes for an entertaining fighter.

[elmersalsa]

Charley Burley reminds me of the great Roy Jones, Jr but, he was a more complete fighter than Roy. Great reflexes, great speed and agility. Amazing footwork and could roll punches while on the ropes.

Now I wonder know why this guy was ducked. And now I can see how the great Archie Moore lost to this guy and why the great trainer Eddie Futch called him "the greatest fighter pound per pound he ever saw".

It is a shame that he never had a title shot. He ended up as a garbage man after boxing in Pittsburgh, PA.

[Ambling Alp]

My only problem with Burley is that he is usually considered so much better than similar fighters from his own era: Holman Williams, Lloyd Marshall, Eddie Booker.
(Burley got into the Hall of Fame back in 1992; thus going from underrated to slightly overrated overnight.)

He was one of the Top 20 Welterweights and Middleweights of All-Time.

[My2Sense]

My only problem with Burley is that he is usually considered so much better than similar fighters from his own era: Holman Williams, Lloyd Marshall, Eddie Booker.
(Burley got into the Hall of Fame back in 1992; thus going from underrated to slightly overrated overnight.)

Agreed there.

Burley is one of those fighters who is rated more on his reputation and hearsay than what he actually did in the ring. That never sits well with me. Note that two of the men you listed there actually beat Burley, yet Burley is praised far more than they are (how is it that Lloyd Marshall is still not in the HOF BTW??? :x ). Burley gets rated so highly in part from praise from his contemporaries (ie: Eddie Futch calling him the best fighter he ever saw), because the win over Moore looks a lot better in retrospect than it did at the time, and because of the perception that Ray Robinson "ducked" him (even though they peaked at different times and in two different weight classes). There are a few knocks against Burley's legacy. He was beaten soundly by guys like Jimmy Bivins and Ezzard Charles when both were still very much young and green, and Burley was at his peak and heavily favored over them. I know it may seem strange to criticize a guy for losing to guys like Bivins or Charles, but remember that Bivins only had about 10-15 pro fights at the time and Charles was getting beat soundly by guys like Overlin, Bivins, and Marshall around that time; a fighter of Burley's alleged class should've been able to take them to school at that time, but instead they outclassed him just on their raw talents alone. As far as Moore goes, remember also that loss came sandwiched in between Moore getting knocked out (not simply decisioned) by Eddie Booker and Bivins. Moore was a good, solid contender at that time but was not the fighter he would be 2 or 3 years later (as evidenced by his wins in return matches with Bivins).

All in all, I think Burley does get slightly oversold these days. I can see him being rated as a top 10 middleweight of all time, but I don't agree that he was in the class of a Ray Robinson, nor do I see him in the top 10-20 P4P of all time.

Incidentally, Lloyd Marshall and Eddie Booker continue to be vastly underrated.

[harrygreb]

dont worry mr burley - i still hold you p4p top 20.

[Ambling Alp]

Top 20 All-time? Counting all weight classes over more than 100 years?
What is the case for him being that high?

[Zelley]

Rating Burley in the top twenty of all time is a hugh stretch.
He could be considered one of many excellent contenders
that were avoided by the champions.

Defeating Archie Moore in 1944 is not enough to be elevated to
the top twenty p4p of all time. After all, Moore didn't win a title
until 1952. Some others defeated the contender Archie Moore
pre-1952 such as Harold Johnson and Holman Williams.

Picking Burley because of his win over Moore is like picking
Randy Sandy for his 1959 points win over Emile Griffith,
or Marty Marshall for his 1954 points win over Sonny Liston.

[harrygreb]

to be honest i was lying in the tub full of fragrant bubbles last night and thinking about ol' charley and my having put him top 20 p4p. so i decided to count out on the bathroom tiles above my head who i would deffo put into the top 20 p4p category....he didnt make it! (top 50 maybe).

[Ambling Alp]

Well, thats more reasonable. You can make a decent case for Burley in the Top 50; certainly he is in the Top 100. Holman Williams, Lloyd Marshall and Eddie Booker shouldn't be far behind him, if not ahead of him.
I won't comment on your bubble bath.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Well, this has taken an unexpected turn...

[jimglen]

Charley Burley IS an All-time great, of this I'm sure - because there are many of them, many to numerous to count, when you think of all the great top fighters who on any given night could have won and held a world title, Charley Burley and the Black murders row are but a handful, there are/WERE many more. Subtract from the equation World titles and achievement (because in Boxing it's not as straight forward as in Sport), Boxing is Business and dozens of top men over the years never got their proper chance.

I also see where 'some' fighters are grossly 'overated', quite often title holders, but the Burley's of boxing are indeed great, to make a top 10 or 50 list or even a top 100, I admit is very difficult indeed and I for one don't even attempt it - I feel more accurate and respectful of all these great fighters to think of them as in bygone days as TRUE World class - Champions & Contenders alike, and there truly are hundreds of them.

From Britain alone I can think of at least 20-30 fighters who meet that criteria and even then I'd be leaving out some good Ol' Boys simply because I just don't know enough and therefore have overlooked some qualifing competitors.

Lists are hard and to often fall to the hands of the overhyped and overated, where as Head to head, peak for peak lists of True top men are more accurate - but harder to do, because there really were a lot of worthy lads!

[harrygreb]

nice post jim

[dr_devious]

From Britain alone I can think of at least 20-30 fighters who meet that criteria and even then I'd be leaving out some good Ol' Boys simply because I just don't know enough and therefore have overlooked some qualifing competitors.

Lists are hard and to often fall to the hands of the overhyped and overated, where as Head to head, peak for peak lists of True top men are more accurate - but harder to do, because there really were a lot of worthy lads!

There arent even 10 fighters from Britain that are as good as Burley,

[jimglen]

I wonder what the very capable Sonny Jones thought about that devious...

I can openly recognize top class, some would rather get their backs patted and been scene in 'favour' or found in the Status Quo of the IN Crowd, but it still be-littles the truth though, doesn't it?

[harrygreb]

it was a nice post because it recognised the grey areas in perceived greatness. something i agree with.

[jimglen]

cheers greb

it is something I strongly believe/know in, shame for the fighters that not enough people consider such truths.

Jim.

[Chuck1052]

Charley Burley often held down a full-time job even when he was a top fighter due to the fact that his ring earnings weren't anything to write home about. How many great fighters had to deal with such a handicap during their prime years in the sport?

- Chuck Johnston

[slakka]

Often overlooked in Burleys evaluation is that of Fritzie Zivic who said Burley compared to Sugar Ray Robinson was a joke. Said SRR was a much greater fighter and nobody could possibly be in a better position to make this comment then him.