Hello, Would John L's legacy hurt or improve if he stayed true to his word and stayed retired after the Kilrain fight? Thank You.
No difference either way is my call. The Killrain fight was the classic case of the once great fighter, pulling off one last great fight. By the time of the Corbett fight, it was simply a question of which of the best three heavyweights in the world, managed to get him into the ring first.
I absolutely think it would. And I think retiring undefeated after you've been on top consistently is a great achievement.
If he'd stayed retired after Kilrain his legacy would be hurt. He wouldn't be remember as the beginning of "the lineage".
It might have lead to Peter Jackson being recognised as the first lineal champion, as acording to the National Police Gazette.
Not losing is always better than losing and since we know he never won again you'd have to assume there's some slight benefit to his retiring. Depends how much you hold the Corbett loss against him. Some see Sullivan as a bloated alcoholic who was a shell of his former self. Some see Sullivan as a man who feasted on semi amateur opposition and lost to the first skilled pugilist he faced. I personally go for the former and therefore don't see it as a huge difference between retiring or losing to Corbett.
I'm with Janitor on this one. By the sounds of things, Sullivan was virtually on a permanent bender and in the worst shape of his career by some way when he lost to Corbett, giving me little reason to take anything away from him
