Page 1 of 1
Tommy Burns vs other Canadian heavies...
Posted: 20 Sep 2008, 09:15
by Robinson
Hey guys
How do you think a peak 1905-1908 Tommy Burns fares against
some of Canada's other top heavies at their respective peaks.
Burns at 5'7 and 185lbs, in top shape and at the time of his international
heavyweight tour.
Vs
Kirk Johnson of the late 90s, 6'1.5 235lbs
George Chuvalo from the mid 60s, 6' , 215lbs
Donovan Ruddock from 1990-92, 6'2, 225lbs
Sam Langford from 1910, 5'8, 180lbs
Earl Walls from early 1950s, 6'2.5, 195lbs
George 'Old Chocolate' Godfrey from mid 1880s, 5'10.5, 175lbs
Robert Cleroux from early 1960s, 6'2, 210lbs
How do you see it and how do you think the 'little giant of Hannover'
fares ?
Thanks again
Kym
Re: Tommy Burns vs other Canadian heavies...
Posted: 20 Sep 2008, 13:17
by Martin Sosa Cameron
George Chuvalo WPTS
Donovan Ruddock WPTS
Sam Langford LKO
Earl Walls WKO
Robert Cleroux WPTS
Trevor Berbick WKO
Re: Tommy Burns vs other Canadian heavies...
Posted: 20 Sep 2008, 14:54
by dempseyfire
I think Burns was a great light HW but only a good HW. His best wins were vs a 169 lb Flynn and a 167 lb O'Brian. Only Hart was a true notable HW scalp, and besides fighting Johnson tough and getting a gift in their fight I don't rank Hart highly. Squires, Moir, and Lang were all inflated overseas records who faltered badly when they stepped up to true world class comp. He had some skills and a dynamite punch for a little man but I don't see him beating Langford, Chuvalo, Cleroux, Berbick, or Ruddock. He could probably pull the trick on Walls and the uninspired Johnson.
Re: Tommy Burns vs other Canadian heavies...
Posted: 20 Sep 2008, 18:04
by jimglen
what about Al Delaney, very good fighter & top ranked - Al fought Joe Louis I believe.
Re: Tommy Burns vs other Canadian heavies...
Posted: 21 Sep 2008, 09:07
by observer1
Robinson wrote:
Burns at 5'7 and 185lbs, in top shape and at the time of his international
heavyweight tour.
Vs
Kirk Johnson of the late 90s, 6'1.5 235lbs - Hmm, i see Burns eeking out a UD on a good day.
George Chuvalo from the mid 60s, 6' , 215lbs - Lose SD
Donovan Ruddock from 1990-92, 6'2, 225lbs - Lose TKO. IMO, Ruddock will cut him up real bad.
Sam Langford from 1910, 5'8, 180lbs - Lose UD
Earl Walls from early 1950s, 6'2.5, 195lbs - Win UD
George 'Old Chocolate' Godfrey from mid 1880s, 5'10.5, 175lbs - Lose UD
Robert Cleroux from early 1960s, 6'2, 210lbs - Win UD.
Re: Tommy Burns vs other Canadian heavies...
Posted: 21 Sep 2008, 20:30
by pound per pound
Robinson wrote:Hey guys
How do you think a peak 1905-1908 Tommy Burns fares against
some of Canada's other top heavies at their respective peaks.
Burns at 5'7 and 185lbs, in top shape and at the time of his international
heavyweight tour.
Vs
Kirk Johnson of the late 90s, 6'1.5 235lbs >>>Johnson via TKO
George Chuvalo from the mid 60s, 6' , 215lbs >>Burns via decison
Donovan Ruddock from 1990-92, 6'2, 225lbs >>Ruddock via TKO
Sam Langford from 1910, 5'8, 180lbs >>Langford vs TKO
Earl Walls from early 1950s, 6'2.5, 195lbs >>>Burns via TKO
George 'Old Chocolate' Godfrey from mid 1880s, 5'10.5, 175lbs >>Burns via TKO.
Robert Cleroux from early 1960s, 6'2, 210lbs >>>Burns via decsion.
How do you see it and how do you think the 'little giant of Hannover'
fares ?
Thanks again
Kym
Re: Tommy Burns vs other Canadian heavies...
Posted: 21 Sep 2008, 20:41
by Robinson
This is how I see it...
Kirk Johnson of the late 90s, 6'1.5 235lbs
Johnson stops Burns around the 4th.
George Chuvalo from the mid 60s, 6' , 215lbs
I think Chuvalo stops Burns in the later rounds
Donovan Ruddock from 1990-92, 6'2, 225lbs
I can see Ruddock stopping Burns in about 5 rounds.
Sam Langford from 1910, 5'8, 180lbs
This would be a good fight, Burns most likely wins a close
decision.
Earl Walls from early 1950s, 6'2.5, 195lbs
I have not watched any Walls fights, so can not make a call.
George 'Old Chocolate' Godfrey from mid 1880s, 5'10.5, 175lbs
I have not seen Old Chocolate fight.
Robert Cleroux from early 1960s, 6'2, 210lbs
I have not seen a Cleroux fight yet.
Re: Tommy Burns vs other Canadian heavies...
Posted: 22 Sep 2008, 15:55
by Jaywheel
Even if Bob Cleroux wasn't the most gifted fighter, he carried a hell of a punch. I can't see a 5'7'' winning a decision against him. Cleroux wins this by KO. To say that Johnson would win by KO and Cleroux lose by decision is clearly not knowing the man. Better off doing like Robinson and admitting not knowing him.
Re: Tommy Burns vs other Canadian heavies...
Posted: 26 Sep 2008, 11:07
by Cap
First off, at his very best, Tommy weighed about 175 soaking wet. He was fast on his feet and packed a helluva punch so he could surprise a few guys. The height thing alone means nothing, as Bill Lang, who he KO'd, was 6'1". If he can land on the other guy's chin, and elude counters, he can put him away.
Take those modern guys and throw them in a ring in 1907 under the conditions of the day with 6-ounce gloves and no mouth piece, etc. and who knows what happens. Cleroux wasn't so much. He probably really lost two of the three against Chuvalo. Kirk Johnson is a half-hearted fighter at best. If he doesn't put Burns away early, he'll fade. Earl Walls was an enigma. He could be hot one fight and cold the next. Larry Gains was a slick boxer who would give Tommy trouble, but Burns would be in there trying at the last bell. Old George Godfrey, at his best, would be carried out. In their respective primes, Burns versus Jack Renault would likely end with a win for The Little Giant of Hanover. Burns easily handled big Arthur Pelkey when they boxed in 1913 and would do likewise with Jack Munroe, Big Bill McKinnon, Elzear Rioux, Al Delaney, Packy Paul, Eddie Wenstob, and Ken Lakusta.
Cap