Does any here have any opinion on him? He always seem to be forgotten when heavyweight champions are discussed. I've only see the footage from his fight with Johnson, so don't know how good he really was or if any other footage exists.
At 5'7 165lbs, he was easily the smallest heavyweight champion but his kayos of very larger men show he packed power. He seemed to be dominant in his time until he met Johnson and then slided downhill. But he was the first heavyweight champion to fight abroad, defending against the champions of Ireland, Australia, etc. though he may have been just trying to avoid Johnson. And does anybody know if it was true that Burns signed to fight McVea in Australia, before deciding on Johnson? I also find it interesting that he was never a dominant middleweight, where it would seem his power would have been of greater impact.
He did beat some credible fighters, Lang, Squires, Hart, Flynn, and O'Brien. Plus he holds the heavyweight record for quickest title dfense with an 88 second kayo of Irish champion Jem Roche.
So, does anyelse have any opinions on him, as a fighter and where he should rank?
Tommy Burns
Tommy Burns was certainly an underrated fighter. The fact that he, despite his size, was among the best heavies around in the early 1900s says something. He was almost always the smaller man and still almost always came out on top in his fights.
Of all the lineal champs, I rate him in the same group as Michael Moorer, Hasim Rahman, James Braddock and Buster Douglas, meaning above Carnera, Willard, Briggs and the Spinks brothers.
I have also heard that he was supposed to fight Sam McVey, but was offered more money aganist Johnson. Supposedly, he was a shrewd businessman and was was a wealthy man when he retired from boxing.
-KOKid-
Of all the lineal champs, I rate him in the same group as Michael Moorer, Hasim Rahman, James Braddock and Buster Douglas, meaning above Carnera, Willard, Briggs and the Spinks brothers.
I have also heard that he was supposed to fight Sam McVey, but was offered more money aganist Johnson. Supposedly, he was a shrewd businessman and was was a wealthy man when he retired from boxing.
-KOKid-
Burns has the best championshiop reign of that era in that he defended frequently quite unlike a lot of those guys. he never stood a chance against Johnson.
You have to respect Burns as a fighter and he achieved a lot at HW. It's hard to pick him many match ups though simply because he really is so small for the weight.
You have to respect Burns as a fighter and he achieved a lot at HW. It's hard to pick him many match ups though simply because he really is so small for the weight.
re
You can do a search on Burns and read what I wrote about him a few months ago. I certainly feel that Burns was one of those types of fighters of the Langford and Walcott ilk in that they did not care about size when it came to fighting and he was more successful than not...very much so! I mentioned this in the last post that I mad eon Burns which is about his fight with Joe Grim. Grim was a fighter who fought everyone and feared no one...he took some of the worst beatings in boxing history and just came back asking for more. However before his fight with Burns he did something that I have never read him do again...when they stripped down to be weighed Grim had second thoughts when he saw the condition Burns was in. Grim refused to go on with the bout unless the promoter would change the rules of the bout...instead of three, three minute rounds (six three minute rounds was the norm in Philadelphia at the time)...Grim insisted that the bout be changed to three, one minute rounds or he would not fight, so the stipulations were changed and Burns gave him his usual beating. Grim was down three times in the first, once without being hit, twice each in the second and third rounds and went down once more, voluntarily without being hit, before the final bell.
I've heard of Joe Grim. That guy must have been nuts. He went and fought some of the greatest fighters of that era, took a beating but lasted the distance. Best example of a journeymen in my eyes.
And I still find it interesting Burns did not have much success at middleweight. Anybody have a clue why?
I'll have to look up your topic Barry, I must have missed it.
And I still find it interesting Burns did not have much success at middleweight. Anybody have a clue why?
I'll have to look up your topic Barry, I must have missed it.
It is hard to think of a champion Burns could beat in a matchup, but I don't think he rolls of easy. The beating he took against Johnson show he was a determined little bugger, and was only stopped again in his last fight, and I don't know the circumstances of the fight.Ezzard wrote:Burns has the best championshiop reign of that era in that he defended frequently quite unlike a lot of those guys. he never stood a chance against Johnson.
You have to respect Burns as a fighter and he achieved a lot at HW. It's hard to pick him many match ups though simply because he really is so small for the weight.
So, I think he loses to about all of them, but is no walk in the park for any of them. He would make them work for a win, and I can't see anyone blowing him out early because of size. Probably takes a beating but would last the distance.
re
Actually I think there are several heavyweight champs that Tommy Burns could have beaten. I rank Burns #20 all-time at heavyweight and #10 light heavyweight...I've never put together a middleweight list, so I don't have him ranked at 160. Burns only lost one bout at middleweight against Jack "Twin" Sullivan, which I don't recall the details of the bout, but I would bet that it was a very close fight. His last bout in which he was knocked out in, he was just too old, but still managed to hang around for several rounds against a tough, younger heavyweight, in Joe Beckett, that was at the time riding pretty high having put away "Bombardier" Billy Wells in the bout before facing Burns.
I think Burns is very underrated and is done so because of his size, but as you mentioned about Johnson, who was a good sized heavyweight, Burns lasted 14 rounds and was still fighting and wanting to fight when the referee stopped it. Some of the other quality top ranked heavyweights that Burns faced, who were good-sized men, were Bill Lang, whom he convincingly beat twice…Bill Squires, the pride, glory and hope of Australia, that is until Burns lowered his sails on three separate occasions…Marvin Hart is another who wasn’t great, but I feel vastly underrated…Gunner Moir out weighed Burns by nearly 30 pounds but he was given a dose of the Burns sleeping potion…against Arthur Pelky he lasted the route and get a draw verdict...then you had master-boxer “Philadelphia” Jack O’Brien, whom Burns beat at his own game by out-boxing O’Brien over twenty.
Yes, I certainly feel that Burns is greatly underrated due to his size, but in his prime a fighting machine that could have stood up to the best of them win, lose or draw!
I think Burns is very underrated and is done so because of his size, but as you mentioned about Johnson, who was a good sized heavyweight, Burns lasted 14 rounds and was still fighting and wanting to fight when the referee stopped it. Some of the other quality top ranked heavyweights that Burns faced, who were good-sized men, were Bill Lang, whom he convincingly beat twice…Bill Squires, the pride, glory and hope of Australia, that is until Burns lowered his sails on three separate occasions…Marvin Hart is another who wasn’t great, but I feel vastly underrated…Gunner Moir out weighed Burns by nearly 30 pounds but he was given a dose of the Burns sleeping potion…against Arthur Pelky he lasted the route and get a draw verdict...then you had master-boxer “Philadelphia” Jack O’Brien, whom Burns beat at his own game by out-boxing O’Brien over twenty.
Yes, I certainly feel that Burns is greatly underrated due to his size, but in his prime a fighting machine that could have stood up to the best of them win, lose or draw!
If you consider his accomplishments as champion then you'd have to rank him in the top five all time.
As a middleweight, Burns (nee Noah Brusso) relied more on speed and defence than one-punch power. In his last few bouts at the middleweight limit, he found it increasingly difficult to make the then 158 pound limit imposed by Tommy Ryan. He realized he'd have to move up when he ran out of gas against Jack "Twin" Sullivan in their 20 round title match.
When Burns "fought" Arthur Pelkey, he was also acting as the big guy's promoter. He later seconded Pelkey when the latter fought Gunboat Smith.
As to how he would've done against other champions, consider Mickey Walker's draw against Jack Sharkey. Tommy Burns carried a bigger punch at 5' 7" 175-180 than Walker at 5' 7" 165-170. Most would have underestimated him and some would've paid the price.
Had he been in top form against Jack Johnson, there might have been a different result. Burns was recovering from sort of influenza when he stepped into the ring at well under 170. As it was, he broke or fractured at least one of Johnson's ribs early in the fight.
Tommy Burns was a great little fighter and should rate high on a pound for pound list.
Cap
As a middleweight, Burns (nee Noah Brusso) relied more on speed and defence than one-punch power. In his last few bouts at the middleweight limit, he found it increasingly difficult to make the then 158 pound limit imposed by Tommy Ryan. He realized he'd have to move up when he ran out of gas against Jack "Twin" Sullivan in their 20 round title match.
When Burns "fought" Arthur Pelkey, he was also acting as the big guy's promoter. He later seconded Pelkey when the latter fought Gunboat Smith.
As to how he would've done against other champions, consider Mickey Walker's draw against Jack Sharkey. Tommy Burns carried a bigger punch at 5' 7" 175-180 than Walker at 5' 7" 165-170. Most would have underestimated him and some would've paid the price.
Had he been in top form against Jack Johnson, there might have been a different result. Burns was recovering from sort of influenza when he stepped into the ring at well under 170. As it was, he broke or fractured at least one of Johnson's ribs early in the fight.
Tommy Burns was a great little fighter and should rate high on a pound for pound list.
Cap
-
Ambling Alp
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 3627
- Joined: 15 Jul 2005, 22:31
Burns may be underrated by some. As mentioned,he was better than champions such as Carnera,Braddock, Willard and Hart, possibly Johananson. You could conceivably also make the case that he was better than the alphabet soup champions like Berbik, Smith, Page, Bruno etc.
However I do think you guys are getting a little carried away. He may be one of the top 40 heavyweights, but there is no way he was one of the top 20.
He has no big wins against any heavyweights before he won the title.
He won the title against possibly the worst heavyweight champion ever.
Most of Burns title defenses weren't against top competiton. O'Brien and maybe Flynn were the only decent contenders he beat.
There is no way that he would have been competitive with Johnson when Johnson was anywhere near his peak.
McVey, Jeannette, and Langford would have easily beaten him as well.
He would have been blown out early by big punchers like Foreman or Louis.
I don't mean to rip him; Burns was an overachiever and had a solid career. He simply wasn't an all-time great heavyweight.
However I do think you guys are getting a little carried away. He may be one of the top 40 heavyweights, but there is no way he was one of the top 20.
He has no big wins against any heavyweights before he won the title.
He won the title against possibly the worst heavyweight champion ever.
Most of Burns title defenses weren't against top competiton. O'Brien and maybe Flynn were the only decent contenders he beat.
There is no way that he would have been competitive with Johnson when Johnson was anywhere near his peak.
McVey, Jeannette, and Langford would have easily beaten him as well.
He would have been blown out early by big punchers like Foreman or Louis.
I don't mean to rip him; Burns was an overachiever and had a solid career. He simply wasn't an all-time great heavyweight.
-
The Great John L
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4351
- Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 19:37
Agreed. However, I don't think anyone here said he was an all time great -- just that he may be under-rated. Of course, you could pull just about any decent fighters name out of a hat and make a case for that fighter being either over-rated or under-rated. We see it done regularly on this forum.Ambling Alp wrote:I don't mean to rip him; Burns was an overachiever and had a solid career. He simply wasn't an all-time great heavyweight.
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
re
>>>Most of Burns title defenses weren't against top competiton.<<<
Burns went around the world fighting the very best that each country had to offer, which no champion had done before him, so it a good business move because of the way that "World Title" was implemented in the tour...he did it in London, he did it in Ireland, he did it in Australia twice with both Squires and Lang...of course at the time the U.S. was where the best talent was, but really the only other opponents at the time besides Johnson were McVey, Jeannette and Langford of which Burns could have competed right beside of each...especially Langford because the size and style was very similar. McVey would have probably given him his toughest go, other than Johnson, but I don't think Burns could have beaten any of the fighters mentioned, but he could certainly compete very well right beside them!
Burns went around the world fighting the very best that each country had to offer, which no champion had done before him, so it a good business move because of the way that "World Title" was implemented in the tour...he did it in London, he did it in Ireland, he did it in Australia twice with both Squires and Lang...of course at the time the U.S. was where the best talent was, but really the only other opponents at the time besides Johnson were McVey, Jeannette and Langford of which Burns could have competed right beside of each...especially Langford because the size and style was very similar. McVey would have probably given him his toughest go, other than Johnson, but I don't think Burns could have beaten any of the fighters mentioned, but he could certainly compete very well right beside them!