Burley vs Robinson

Have just finished reading 'Charley Burley and the Black Murderers Row'.

Being a fairly new boxing geek (learning about the history as well as watching the current fighters) I was intrigued about the claims that Sugar Ray Robinson wanted no part of Burley and was requesting 50k to fight him when he'd usually get less than 10k for a fight. When later offered 60k he again refused the fight.

Is this a case of Robinson 'avoiding' Burley or was it more a case of the writer making more of the story than there was?

Was a really good book as well.

Huw as a massive Burley fan and so am probably not best placed to comment with any objectivity but there is a story that does the rounds that when this fight was mooted Robinson, or rather his people insisted on a three fight series where Charley had to throw the first an offer he refused on the grounds he did not take part in fixed fights under any circumstances and he was not satisfied they would go through with the next two fights, all rumours but have heard it said more than once.

Seems silly to call the greatest of all time a ducker and is not something I am likely to do here but it does appear Burley had Robbo spooked a little, even a well known story of Robinson watching Burley fight and when he was asked when he would fight Burley responding that "he was too pretty to fight Burley"

To be honest whilst Burley was obviously avoided he was also damned unlucky, his peak years pretty much coincided with the second world war so a lot of the belts were put on ice meaning offers to both Cochran at welter and Zale at middle could be easily ignored. Also his style whilst sublime was not always fan friendly.

Would not say Robinson avoided him, certainly no more than other champions at welter and middle during the period, but as an exceptionally talented black fighter who was not particularly great to watch he was probably top of the who needs him club.

Agree the book is terrific though.

Personally Jeff I don't rate Burley at all...

On a serious note and to avoid being hunted down and whipped like a cur, I've yet to get around to reading the Harry Otty book despite having had it now for several months. Once I've finished reading The Hitler Book (actual title) I'll maybe give it a go.

I've got the Hitler book Balti, never got round to reading it, ploughed through Ian Kershaw's biography of him, after that will be quite some time before I dare face another book on the man.

It's pretty good, and gives information on thigns which are often not detailed. There are some discrepancies but these are usually pointed out with editorial notes and explained satisfactorily. I'm a bit of a slow reader 'cause I usually only bother on the buses to and from work. Add in that I tend to buy books on a whim sometimes and I've a fair few I've never touched. Have a fat Hitler biography by Fest which is just daring me to read it but it's a bit intimidating what with being about three inches thick. ...which is what she said. Fnarr fnarr! I lost interest in the Kahn biography on Dempsey towards the end because the guy was just too sycophantic for my liking. I'd rather be presented with the facts and left to draw my own conclusions. It's due to the constant and repeated praise the Otty book receives on here from yourself among others that I bought it in the first place.

I stopped the Kahn biography and forced myself to finish it as I bought it in New York so felt some sort of sense of obligation, agree about the sycophancy of him though, he actually gets worse towards the end where he point blank says the second Tunney fight was a fix or the ref was bent. For an author to make such an assertion with nothing but hearsay and rumour as his evidence is beyond shameful. Pity because the guy is obviously a talented writer, but is like a biography of Manny written by D4.

rowley wrote:Huw as a massive Burley fan and so am probably not best placed to comment with any objectivity but there is a story that does the rounds that when this fight was mooted Robinson, or rather his people insisted on a three fight series where Charley had to throw the first an offer he refused on the grounds he did not take part in fixed fights under any circumstances and he was not satisfied they would go through with the next two fights, all rumours but have heard it said more than once.

Seems silly to call the greatest of all time a ducker and is not something I am likely to do here but it does appear Burley had Robbo spooked a little, even a well known story of Robinson watching Burley fight and when he was asked when he would fight Burley responding that "he was too pretty to fight Burley"

To be honest whilst Burley was obviously avoided he was also damned unlucky, his peak years pretty much coincided with the second world war so a lot of the belts were put on ice meaning offers to both Cochran at welter and Zale at middle could be easily ignored. Also his style whilst sublime was not always fan friendly.

Would not say Robinson avoided him, certainly no more than other champions at welter and middle during the period, but as an exceptionally talented black fighter who was not particularly great to watch he was probably top of the who needs him club.

Agree the book is terrific though.

Thanks Rowley. It does seem the book wants to show Robinson avoiding him but reading between the lines a little it does also seem to show that there may have been legitimate reasons why they wouldn't have wanted the risk - mainly being the risk of fighting a dangerous opponent that would make you bad even if you did win.

He did seem incredibly unlucky.

As a big fan is there any further reading on Burley you'd recommend?

There is another biography but I have not read it, and from the reports I have read Otty's is much the better book. He is featured in a new book called uncrowned champions which is meant to be excellent but I have not read it yet so can't confirm this. He has a website the link for which is in the vault, some decent stuff on there including the little footage that remains of him.

Windy has posted some stuff on here before such as newspaper reports of his fights, as has Jimmy Stuart in the past but Jimmy's visits to here are unfortunately few and far between at the minute.

Something I find significant is that even ' Time ' magazine carried an article or two in the subject of Robinson's possibly having avoided Burley. Significant, since ' Time ' is such an iconic publication and Robinson was always hugely popular.

I have at least one article on disc, somewhere, though I believe it came down as a PDF. Easy enough, though, for those interested to Google ' Time ' magazine and then search ' Charley Burley.'

It does seem strange that though Robinson existed in the era that was littered with the murderers row fighters and other dangermen that he managed to fight so few of them. Even on the way up he managed to avoid fighting them. Holman Williams, Cocoa Kid, Burley, Booker, Wade etc. How did he manage to avoid these guys when they were all fighting each other?

I dont know if its coincidence or design but he always seemed to remain a step behind them in terms of divisions and career path. He stays at welter when they move to middleweight and he only really moves to middleweight when they have retired or moved to lightheavy. Given that during his welterweight years he regularly fought above the limit and given that many of those above fighters could easily have made welterweight it does seem strange that he never even fought them in non title bouts.

manos de piedra wrote:It does seem strange that though Robinson existed in the era that was littered with the murderers row fighters and other dangermen that he managed to fight so few of them. Even on the way up he managed to avoid fighting them. Holman Williams, Cocoa Kid, Burley, Booker, Wade etc. How did he manage to avoid these guys when they were all fighting each other?

I dont know if its coincidence or design but he always seemed to remain a step behind them in terms of divisions and career path. He stays at welter when they move to middleweight and he only really moves to middleweight when they have retired or moved to lightheavy. Given that during his welterweight years he regularly fought above the limit and given that many of those above fighters could easily have made welterweight it does seem strange that he never even fought them in non title bouts.

The most astonishing thing is that the welterweight champion (Zivic) actually bought out Burley's contract and managed him behinds the scenes whilst he was champion (Burley had beaten Zivic 2/3 fights and was apparently robbed in the one zivic won).

huw wrote:

manos de piedra wrote:It does seem strange that though Robinson existed in the era that was littered with the murderers row fighters and other dangermen that he managed to fight so few of them. Even on the way up he managed to avoid fighting them. Holman Williams, Cocoa Kid, Burley, Booker, Wade etc. How did he manage to avoid these guys when they were all fighting each other?

I dont know if its coincidence or design but he always seemed to remain a step behind them in terms of divisions and career path. He stays at welter when they move to middleweight and he only really moves to middleweight when they have retired or moved to lightheavy. Given that during his welterweight years he regularly fought above the limit and given that many of those above fighters could easily have made welterweight it does seem strange that he never even fought them in non title bouts.

The most astonishing thing is that the welterweight champion (Zivic) actually bought out Burley's contract and managed him behinds the scenes whilst he was champion (Burley had beaten Zivic 2/3 fights and was apparently robbed in the one zivic won).

It is laughable isn't it, Burley goes 2 for 3 against Zivic and Zivic gets the title shot, there are also rumours he offered to fight Cochran when he had the title for nothing and still could not get the shot.

The more delving into Robinsons career I do, the more I think he gets a bit of an easy ride in relation to the murderers row. Most of the white champs of the era are marked with an asterix due to their failure to face the dangermen but Robinson doesnt seem to despite there being enough evidence to at least build offer an argument.

He fought the likes of Jannazo, Basora, Zivic and La Motta multiple times but never faced Holman Williams, Charley Burley, the Cocoa Kid, Eddie Booker, Llyold Marshall, Jack Chase and many others. Surely the exact same argument levelled at the likes of Zale and Cochrane (while certainly lesser champions than Robinson) can be levelled at Robinson? It seems to me that because the feeling Robinson would still have been a bonafide champion with or without the MR that people are less likely to criticise than the likes of Zale or Cochrane who most likely would not have been champions had they taken on all comers.

You also have reports of Robinson refusing to fight when he realised his TBA opponent was actually the Cocao Kid and demanding double the agreed fee. Promising Tiger Wade a shot in exchange for sparring until Wade cracked one of his ribs and turning down more than reasonable offers to face Burley.

The likes of Jack Johnson get criticised for slamming the door shut on black fighters after becoming champion and his excuse was there was no money in it. This seems to be a similar argument put forward by Robinson in relation to not facing the MR. But unlike Johnson he didnt seem to beat these guys on the way up either. Other than Kid Gavilan, Robinsons welterweight title defences are fairly unspectacular and one would have to think there were more deserving opponents.

Im becoming less and less convinced that Robinsons undisputed place atop of the all time best list is a rock solid as is traditionally held and the likes of Armstrong, Greb and Charles in particular I would see as having strong challenges.

Some superb and thought provoking points there, manos.

It does seem fair to suggest that, somewhere along the line, Robinson would normally have bumped heads with at least a couple of the fighters from the BMR, and it does raise suspicions that, perhaps, he skillfully sidestepped them.

Worthy of some very deep research and analysis of the timeline, methinks.

Did come across something similar on Eastside many a moon back and someone argued the time line was pretty favourable to Robbo, certainly in regard to a lot of the BMR, but like Windy have never really researched it in any great depth. Do think though that given the frequency with which those guys fought back then and how frequently many members of the BMR fought each other for Robbo not to have locked horns with virtually any of them is certainly a question worthy of further examination.

Especially at Middleweight Robbo certainly favoured brawlers over boxers.

I never thought that I would think such a thing about Robinson, but I'm bound to agree with Manos. I'm staying my hand for the moment, but through the prompting of folk like Jeff and Colonial Lion and a good deal of reading around the BMR era, it's clear that there are at least a dozen contemporary fighters of world class and roughly the same weight who did not share a ring with Robinson. Two or three might be held to be one of those things - hell, perhaps even four or five - but to have fought absolutely none of them?

For so long, I've had my top 6 of Robinson, Armstrong, Jofre, Ali, Greb and Charles set in concrete, and it may just be time to to start all over again. The same names, perhaps, but in a different order.

It would appear that today is judgement day for SRR. A 606v2 revolt is well and truly underway, is the great man about to be toppled?

Fists of Fury wrote:It would appear that today is judgement day for SRR. A 606v2 revolt is well and truly underway, is the great man about to be toppled?

Greb has a good shout. Can't wait for the new book on him, but then it's been in progress for about 10 years.

See, I knew all along my constant talk of Burley was not just the ravings of a mad man with too much time on his hands and a lack of hobbies. I'll have him breaking the top ten P4P list before long.

Scottrf wrote:

Fists of Fury wrote:It would appear that today is judgement day for SRR. A 606v2 revolt is well and truly underway, is the great man about to be toppled?

Greb has a good shout. Can't wait for the new book on him, but then it's been in progress for about 10 years.

Who's doing it Scott?

The Galveston Giant wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

Fists of Fury wrote:It would appear that today is judgement day for SRR. A 606v2 revolt is well and truly underway, is the great man about to be toppled?

Greb has a good shout. Can't wait for the new book on him, but then it's been in progress for about 10 years.

Who's doing it Scott?

Guy who posts on forums by name of Klompton, Steve Compton is his real name. Will be called Live Fast, Die Young I believe.

Exellent, thanks mate.

rowley wrote:See, I knew all along my constant talk of Burley was not just the ravings of a mad man with too much time on his hands and a lack of hobbies. I'll have him breaking the top ten P4P list before long.

Doesn't necessarily mean you're not those things though rowley...

BALTIMORA wrote:

rowley wrote:See, I knew all along my constant talk of Burley was not just the ravings of a mad man with too much time on his hands and a lack of hobbies. I'll have him breaking the top ten P4P list before long.

Doesn't necessarily mean you're not those things though rowley...

Would never even try to deny it mate, think the evidence to the contrary is too overwhelming.

its official then... robinson's a fraud, let's all reappraise our all time great's list and file him next to calzaghe at two hundred and something

Case for the defence time...

Looking back, we'd have loved him to have fought these guys (particularly now we've all read a book about them), but just how clear was the crossover period really for a lot of these guys. SRR didn't make his debut until 1940 as pretty much a lightweight, burley was probably at or close to his peak then.

Much is made that the bmr fighters, particularly burley fought from welter to light heavy, true in most cases but also true that like modern fighters they tended to do it as they grew older. It's not like tonight matthew i'm going to be a welterweight.

To the best of my knowledge, Robinson was younger than all the bmr guys.

Could the fights have happened? Sure, most likely with a younger robinson giving some pounds away, or at catch weight in the later 40's. Would it have been great for us to see them? sure. Should they have happened? Frankly, i think that's a tough call to make, though certainly it would look good retrospectively to have seen a few of them on the cv.

By the mid 40's when robinson was establishing himself as the man at welter, most if not all of the bmr were at middle. As Manos says, srr didn't go to middle til they'd all retired/moved up. Coincidence? conspiracy? Well unfortunately, none of them were ever title holders, and when he went up to middle he did so for the title and for good, so he hardly avoided them in that way.

Despite all the above, the fights obviously could have happened and discussions about burley and robinson did take place. It's risk reward though, burley himself says there was no money in the fight, and had the roles been reversed he wouldn't have taken the robinson fight.

Like everything that's what it comes down to, risk v reward... and that's before we even start on the mob politics.

Great fighter burley and seemingly a likeable fair minded guy... more so probably than robinson. Not sure we should be trashing sugar ray's legacy though because they didn't fight. It's not quite mayweather pacqiaio.

Good post milky but if you take a deep breath most of us have acknowledged that we have not really researched the time line to see how viable, realistic the fights were. I even stated I have seen before someone argue the timeline didn't quite match up. So rest easy old boy nobody is trashing Ray, no need I am content in the knowledge Burley would have kicked his ass so all is good with me.

I would be more inclined to buy the argument that Robinson was a weight behind many of the murderers row if he had not fought the likes of LaMotta, Jannazzo and Basora so often who regularly weighed in or around the middleweight limit. Certainly Cocoa Kid, Burley and Williams could easily make Welter for most of their careers. If you look at the point Robinson himself moves to middleweight it does suspiciously coincide with the end of the murderers row era when most had retired. He is also known to have sparred frequently with guys like Wade and the Cocoa Kid so was well aware of what they had to offer.

I could also even accept him not given the these dangerous guys title fights to a point but given how often he fought non title match ups it does seem strange that he never faced them with the title off limits. As captain says, its not just one or two fighters but potentially as many as 6/7.

Even the black fighters who did manage to escape the shackles and find title shots like Charles and Moore still had to more than pay their dues against the murder row fighters on their way up which makes Robinson somewhat unique in that period as being a black fighter who seldom met any of these rivals at any point.

Theres obviously enough quality elsewhere to remove any doubts about Robinsons ability but I do think his record is noticeable in its abscence of black fighters, especially the notoriously avoided ones.

Point is that I am beginning to feel as though I've given Robinson a free pass for things that I've raised an eyebrow at with other fighters. It's not a question of wondering whether he might have beaten Pete Buckley; just a reappraisal of the justification for sticking him in unthinkingly at number 1, which I have done for so long.

As far as the time line is concerned, it seems to me on an admittedly cursory examination, that around 42 or 43, Robinson could have fought Burley or Cocoa Kid in a bona fide welterweight contest, while he could also have fought Booker, Chase, Wade and maybe Williams at around the same time had he been prepared to spot them the same kind of weight advantage that LaMotta regularly had over him. Marshall and, of course, Bivins were much too big for Robinson at this point, and I haven't checked up on Lytell. Questions do remain to a certain extent.

captain carrantuohil wrote:Point is that I am beginning to feel as though I've given Robinson a free pass for things that I've raised an eyebrow at with other fighters. It's not a question of wondering whether he might have beaten Pete Buckley; just a reappraisal of the justification for sticking him in unthinkingly at number 1, which I have done for so long.

As far as the time line is concerned, it seems to me on an admittedly cursory examination, that around 42 or 43, Robinson could have fought Burley or Cocoa Kid in a bona fide welterweight contest, while he could also have fought Booker, Chase, Wade and maybe Williams at around the same time had he been prepared to spot them the same kind of weight advantage that LaMotta regularly had over him. Marshall and, of course, Bivins were much too big for Robinson at this point, and I haven't checked up on Lytell. Questions do remain to a certain extent.

Im just having a look at Robnsons record now, interestingly he fights LaMotta in 1945 which is about 8 months after Lloyd Marshall beat him at 160 so even a fight with Marshall may have been possible. Its difficult to know what kind of limits the murder row fighters could make when they had to because since all their bouts were generaly non title there was rarely an incentive for them to cut weights. But the likes of Marshall, Moore and Charles showed they could make the middleweight limit without too many problems for most of their careers.

Also, in the early to mid 40s while Robinson was at welter he fought the likes of Abrams, Basora, LaMotta, Belloise amongst others who were all rated at middleweight alongside the likes of Williams, Burley, Chase, Booker, Wade and Cocoa Kid at various points indicating there might have just been a policy. For example in 1945 Robinson fought La Motta twice as well as Basora who were both rated middleweight contenders. The number 1 and 2 ranked top contenders to Zales title at the time were Williams and Burley.......

This is little more than a cursory look at Robinsons record but have to say it does provide some interesting results and food for thought.

jeff/manos... had the thread taken a 'robinson is god' angle i'd have been making your arguments with you

moore was older than robinson, manos. charles is of a similar age to srrr, and made his debut the same year... but weighing about 20 lbs more. And yes both fought most of the bmr guys, for those reasons.

Admittedly burley gave weight away to charles when they fought.

Realistically to me though, of the bmr guys robinson could have fought cocoa kid, burley and williams were the only viable candidates,where you can make a could have/should have happened case.

he may have fought guys who were middle like la motta, that proves he was prepared to, but he himself never came in above welter until the back end of the decade. Williams, burley etc may have been able to make welter their whole careers had they been granted the title shot they deserved, but burley never actually did during the 40's... robinson would likely have been giving something away in weight and experience.

Looks to me, like a management team steering their guy to a shot not wanting to take too many risks against dangerous opposition... the pattern for today's fighters.

I don't dispute they're a black mark against robinson, i'm merely standing his corner as to how black.

I accept the point on age differences and weights but Basora, Jannazzo and Abrams for exmple were no older or heavier than many of the murderers row.

The point being he seemed willing to face some and not others. Like captain has said, you could understand him not fighting the upper limit guys such as Charles or Moore for example but certainly Booker, Williams, Burley, Wade (think he fought him in Wades final fight) Cocoa Kid etc appear to be perfectly reasonable opponents for him.

picking up on your point and captain's circa viable opponents circa 1942/3. If you were managing robinson would you match your 2 year novice pro, with these guys? You might as a learning curve, but you'd think long and hard about it.

I can see the logic in fighting a la motta... just the white brawler you'd have to beat when you finally get your title shot... ahead of them.

Like i say, he could have fought them, but should have? Easier in hindsight imo, especially when its about guys when you're on the way up.... different thing to avoiding clear challengers as a champion imo.

Like you, i'd like to have seen 1 or 2 on his cv though.

When first reading this article last night and the initial responses from Windy, Manos and Jeff, I did start to think about the timelines and promised myself to do some research on these to establish if SRR could be excused for avoiding Burley and co. If no one else gets to it first, I will endeavour to pull something together and will post the results.

At this rate, the famous 606 assertion that Jamie Moore would beat SRR may not be that far off the mark!!

superflyweight wrote:

At this rate, the famous 606 assertion that Jamie Moore would beat SRR may not be that far off the mark!!

And we were foolish enough to mock him at the time.

I agree Manos, never rated Robinson as the number one guy myself, would be behind Greb, Langford, Fitz, Charles and Armstrong.

Been mocked many times for not having Robinson in my top 5 it's all very subjective and awfully close, but he kinda gets a nostalgic nod approval and some of his fight choices get swept under the carpet. Also feel Ali shouldn't be a top 10 P4P either, as great as he was and through no fault of his own, he never beat all round better fighters, i'e Duran beat Leonard in P4P stakes, Ali never beat as good as a fighter of Leonards stature, no fault of his own may I add.

One essential point is being missed here.Professional fighters fight for money and not their subsequent legacy
Robinson did not fight Burley because there was no great incentive for him.Professional fighters fight for cash and there is always the money v risk element to that.Many elements to that including race but it wasn't 2012.
I am a Burley fan .Could he have beaten Ray ? Well yes i think so at his best.Ray would be the favourite though and would win a three match series in my opinion.That's all conjecture however
Just to move briefly to the Robinson v BMR thoughts. No reason for Ray to fight them other than to help latter day historians .The fights would not have generated the money and Robinson knew his value and drove a hard deal.Dont forget he had to deal with the colour bar as well to get the title.
I admire anyone researching the BMR and that time but dont rely on stats alone as they can prove anything.Those guys were fighting so regularly that analysis is almost impossible .Try and work out Holman Williams place in that group as case in point.
Robinson still the number 1 for me and only Greb comes close
There is a danger that we over analyse a fighters record with the benefit of hindsight,internet etc. It has happened to Dempsey many times and i think it is starting to happen with Ray Robinson

skidd1 wrote:One essential point is being missed here.Professional fighters fight for money and not their subsequent legacy
Robinson did not fight Burley because there was no great incentive for him.Professional fighters fight for cash and there is always the money v risk element to that.Many elements to that including race but it wasn't 2012.
I am a Burley fan .Could he have beaten Ray ? Well yes i think so at his best.Ray would be the favourite though and would win a three match series in my opinion.That's all conjecture however
Just to move briefly to the Robinson v BMR thoughts. No reason for Ray to fight them other than to help latter day historians .The fights would not have generated the money and Robinson knew his value and drove a hard deal.Dont forget he had to deal with the colour bar as well to get the title.
I admire anyone researching the BMR and that time but dont rely on stats alone as they can prove anything.Those guys were fighting so regularly that analysis is almost impossible .Try and work out Holman Williams place in that group as case in point.
Robinson still the number 1 for me and only Greb comes close
There is a danger that we over analyse a fighters record with the benefit of hindsight,internet etc. It has happened to Dempsey many times and i think it is starting to happen with Ray Robinson

I dont think the point about fighting for money is being missed. We are judging Robinsons legacy so who he fought/didnt fight has a bearing on that. If he avoided top names of his era his legacy should suffer as would any others.

Im not trying to trash his legacy or insinuate hes a fraud or anything but he does seem to enjoy a near untouchable status at the top that Im not sure is warranted and if the other champions of the era are marked down for avoiding these top fighters then I dont think Robinson should be immune either.

Have looked into the timelines/weight classes myself earlier today and do feel that he has very little excuse other than the age old/risk reward one for not fighting the likes of Holman Williams, Cocoa Kid, Burley, Booker at the least and there is also reasonable evidence to suggest that he actually consciously avoided these fights rather than it being down to timing or weight differences.

milkyboy wrote:picking up on your point and captain's circa viable opponents circa 1942/3. If you were managing robinson would you match your 2 year novice pro, with these guys? You might as a learning curve, but you'd think long and hard about it.

I can see the logic in fighting a la motta... just the white brawler you'd have to beat when you finally get your title shot... ahead of them.

Like i say, he could have fought them, but should have? Easier in hindsight imo, especially when its about guys when you're on the way up.... different thing to avoiding clear challengers as a champion imo.

Like you, i'd like to have seen 1 or 2 on his cv though.

Im not too sure. By 1942/43 Robinson was the number 1 challenger to Cochranes title and we be avoided himself for another few years. He had already fought and beat some top names so I think he would have to be considered above a novice.

As with Johnson, Im also unconvinced by the argument that there was no money or point in fighting these guys. There are reasonably supported reports of Robinson being offered substantial money to fight the likes of Cocoa Kid and Burley. These fighters were also top ranked. They may not have been given title opportunities, but they were far from unknown or unrated and were widely considered the best qualified challengers on merit. As pointed out on the HoF thread Williams was a top ten ranked opponent for almost a decade, similar with Burley and many of the other top black fighters. Charles as we know never got to fight for the light heavy title despite hands down proving he was the best qualified.

Robinsons greatness and ability is undeniable but its really about analysing how great and whether his claim as the best is without doubt. I have to say, great fighter as he was, I still think there are fighters out there with an argument to rival him and the accusation that Robinson avoided many of the top contenders of the day (for whatever reason) is worthy of analysis. I think its become a little too automatic to rate him as a clear number 1 with few, if any faults.

manos de piedra wrote:
Robinsons greatness and ability is undeniable but its really about analysing how great and whether his claim as the best is without doubt. I have to say, great fighter as he was, I still think there are fighters out there with an argument to rival him and the accusation that Robinson avoided many of the top contenders of the day (for whatever reason) is worthy of analysis. I think its become a little too automatic to rate him as a clear number 1 with few, if any faults.

That's the beauty of a thread such as this.

For years, when contemplating the true greats, I've simply plonked Robinson in at number one and then begun the process of sorting out the rest. I never questioned Robinson's supremacy at all, despite the fact that Greb - by way of example - long ago captured my imagination to a far greater extent than Sugar Ray ever did.

Now there are little doubts niggling away at me, and I find myself extremely frustrated since, having just moved, I don't yet have a proper Internet connection and have to make do with one of these horrible pre paid USB sticks, which makes proper research impractical. Until I can get stuck in, myself, I shall be hoping that you fellas continue this discussion and lift the lid on Robinson and the fighters who comprised the BMR. The upside to it all is that I've finally gotten round to ordering the Harry Otty bio of Burley which will, doubtless, please jeffrowley no end.

Wonderful thread and fascinating comments from you fellas, thus far. Keep them coming.

skidd1 wrote:One essential point is being missed here.Professional fighters fight for money and not their subsequent legacy
Robinson did not fight Burley because there was no great incentive for him.Professional fighters fight for cash and there is always the money v risk element to that.Many elements to that including race but it wasn't 2012.
I am a Burley fan .Could he have beaten Ray ? Well yes i think so at his best.Ray would be the favourite though and would win a three match series in my opinion.That's all conjecture however
Just to move briefly to the Robinson v BMR thoughts. No reason for Ray to fight them other than to help latter day historians .The fights would not have generated the money and Robinson knew his value and drove a hard deal.Dont forget he had to deal with the colour bar as well to get the title.
I admire anyone researching the BMR and that time but dont rely on stats alone as they can prove anything.Those guys were fighting so regularly that analysis is almost impossible .Try and work out Holman Williams place in that group as case in point.
Robinson still the number 1 for me and only Greb comes close
There is a danger that we over analyse a fighters record with the benefit of hindsight,internet etc. It has happened to Dempsey many times and i think it is starting to happen with Ray Robinson

Robinson was offered 5-6 times his usual asking price for a fight with Burley. Don't think the money aspect comes into it.

HumanWindmill wrote:. The upside to it all is that I've finally gotten round to ordering the Harry Otty bio of Burley which will, doubtless, please jeffrowley no end.

.

About time Windy, fully expect to see him troubling your P4P top ten shortly. Like you say though this thread is interesting. You have to tread carefully questioning things like Robbos number one position as for many it is seen as sacriledge and whilst nobody wants to see an undoubted great recieve an undeserved kicking no fighter should be held up to a lesser level of scrutiny than another and as we have seen the likes of Dempsey and Johnson get questioned over some of the opponents they failed to face seems only fair a similar question can be asked of Robinson or any other great. Once we have finished on Robbo, Armstrong can be next for facing Zivic rather than Burley.

Exactly.

I certainly wouldn't advocate a Robinson witch hunt - far too many great fighters have found themselves the victim of fashion in this manner - but the collective comments here have persuaded me to undertake some honest and impartial analysis.

As to the Burley bio, I am looking forward, once having read it, to serving under your command until we plant his flag among the immortals.

This is always a fascinating subject in one of boxings most interesting periods.
As many of you know, I am a huge fan of the Murderers Row fighters and associates and view them as something of a lost generation of champions I think with robinson, his defence lies in three areas:

1. Timing
2. Circumstances
3. Talent

Talent is probably the most straighforward aspect. Robinson essentially turned pro in 1941. After his first year as a professional he was considered to be the number 1 candidate to Freddie Cochranes title which gives you an idea of how fast he progressed. In his first two years as a professional he alread racked up wins over the likes of Angott, Armstrong, LaMotta, Zivic and Shapiro in a remarkeable run that saw him only lose one decision at Middleweight to LaMotta. Talent wise probably only Burley of the murderers row could claim to come close to him and none of the murderers row could match his consistency even at that young age that he was.

The more debateable and interesting areas are in relation to timing and circumstances. Robinson as never a member of the murderes row. He came along shortly after and didnt suffer to the same to the same extent. I think we have to draw a line between fights that are theoretically possible and fights that are reasonably expected or obliged. To this end I would say that fights with the likes of Moore, Charles, Chase, Marshall, Booker and Bivins were largely unrealistic. Fighters like Burley or Williams had to take these kind of fights due to neccessity or lack of options or sheer desperation but for a largely welterweight Robinson to be expected to chase these guys up the weights when he didnt have to I think is stretching it. Yes, Charles or Moore could have made 160 and yes Robinson was known to take on middleweights occasionally but in a modern context this would be like expecting Pacquiao to take on Martinez at Middleweight. The fight could happen in theory and light middleweight but is it really a fair obligation that should be imposed? I dont think so. When Robinson won his title in 1946 there was no chance of the above mentioned fighters making the 147 limit either so any fight would be a non title affair that Robinson had absolutely no vested reason to partake in. So due to circumstances I would rule out many of those guys as realistic options, especially when they offered little in the way of title opportunities or advancement and couldnt make welterweight.

However there are three guys that I would earmark as being opponents that were capable of ticking all the boxes in terms of timing, circumstances and talent. These would be Burley, Holman Williams and to a lesser extent the Cocoa Kid and in each case I stil think they come with a reasonable defence for Robinson. Again timing and circumstances are important. Burley was a little different so I will come to him later and just deal with Williams and Cocoa Kid first who are a little more straightforward.

The window where these fightwith Williams and Cocoa Kid to occur was primarily 1942-45. With Americas entry into world war two the middleweight and welterweight titles were put on ice for the guts of 4 years and went undefended while champions like Cochrane and Zale served in the United States military. So Robinson despite being the number 1 contender since 1941/2 only got to fight for and capture his title in 1946.

By this time Holman Williams and the Cocoa Kid had faded from the scene as top contenders, Williams being dreadfully unlucky that the war robbed him of a shot at the middleweight title just when it seemed he may get it, and by the time it ended it was too late for him, he was past it and faded away. And the Cocoa Kid had dropped off due to inconsistency. So we can definately rule out title defences against Williams and Cocoa Kid as never feasible - they were gone when Robinson became champion. However there is a window of a couple of years during the war where these fights could have happened without too much difficulty. One being that the titles were shelved indefinately and two being that the weight would not have been a problem. However there are other considerations that must be looked at. Robinson then, was not as we think of Robinson now. He was not yet a world champion. He was regarded as the number 1 contender to the welterweight title. At precisely the same time Holman Williams (and Burley) were considered the amongst the forerunners for the middleweight title. All three were desperate for a shot at the respective titles and were really waiting for the titles to become active again so they could seize their oportunity in different weight classes. Although fights could have happened, there wasnt a huge incentive for Williams or Burley to come down and contest Robinsons welterweight status and likewise there was not much point in Robinson jeopardising his position by going up and facing Burley or Williams at middleweight when he was the top ranked welterweight. None of them were champions and all three were close to title shots in different weight clases (hence why Williams and Burley were fighting each other in the period). Although contests between the three would have been fascinating around the 1943 mark, the fact that the three were highly ranked in different weight classes did lessen the neccessatiy for the fights to take place.

Burley is somewhat different to the others as hes still a valid opponent for Robinson after Robinson wins his title. In this regard and with other evidence we have it would seem that Robinson does certainly have a case to answer in Burley much more so than others. He was still very much a top operator while Robinson was welterweight champion, he made valid attempts to secure a fight and he could make 147 to 160 if needed even on a non title basis. the defences for Robinson here are less robust. One is that Burley was still in contention for the middleweight title upon the end of WWII so he did have his sights set more on Zale than Robinson. Unfortunately Zale avoided him and embarked on a trilogy with Graziano which shut out Burley and eventually saw him retire after numerous futile attempts to secure opportunities and being largely mismanaged. With the evaporation of most of his murderers row rivals he began struggling for fights in general and as such lost his ranking position. Its more difficult to defend Robinsons decision not to fight Burley as its a fight that could and probably should have been made at some point even as a non title affair.

well there you go... i was just about to hit send on a fairly lengthy post, when i spotted that CL had made every point i was about to make, only far better, and with a far greater knowledge of the period.

Why do we bother, hey!

milkyboy wrote:well there you go... i was just about to hit send on a fairly lengthy post, when i spotted that CL had made every point i was about to make, only far better, and with a far greater knowledge of the period.

Why do we bother, hey!

It is one hell of a post isn't it Milky, think to summarise we are all pretty much agreed Burley deserves to replace Robinson at the top of the P4P list. Good work all round.

I suspect that Colonial Lion was a defence lawyer during his working years.

And an exceptonally good one, at that.

I guess that saves me a fair bit of research. Great post, CL and proved the point that I was hoping I would be able to make after some research.

I still have SRR slightly ahead of Greb as P4P number 1 but this thread has made me question that in a way I never thought I would.

For anyone that is interested this looks like a decent little video showcasing some of Burleys talents.

At work so only watched half and without sound, what I saw looked good though:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81non05aKX4&feature=related

huw wrote:For anyone that is interested this looks like a decent little video showcasing some of Burleys talents.

At work so only watched half and without sound, what I saw looked good though:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81non05aKX4&feature=related

Good video mate shows how complicated boxing is it is not easy! Would this guy be able to beat Hopkins or De la Hoya? Im not sure I dont think he would tbh they were pure class and some of the best of all time when they were in their primes. I reckon Suger Ray Robinson would beat him too he was one of the best old boxers.