The 1880's!

Remember LHW didn't exist and MW was in the 150s. HW didn't have a minimum weight requirement. Its not a weight class. Everything else is a carveout from HW.

Cleary has the earliest debut of a notable gloved HW in 1875. If Cleary was born in 1858 this means he was 16 years old during his first fight. While narrowly in the realm of possibility I find the 1850 birthday much more likely.

 

I love this thread title more than I love some of my relatives that I kind of like.

 

Sporting Life lists him as 27 in April 1884, putting his birth date somewhere between May 1856 and April 1857.

 

The Minneapolis journal January 10, 1903:

"During the eighties existed a boxing school taught by one of the best masters of ring craft the country has ever seen - John Donaldson, who taught James J Corbett to fight, and gave the Californian the science that later enabled him to defeat Sullivan and gain the championship of the world. Donaldson is believed by many to have been the originator of the sidestep, now one of the first principles of the game of slug, but which was practically unknown a dozen years ago, when the Sullivan system of hit and be hit was the ideal.

To Donaldson's instruction is largely due the fame which Minneapolis fighters acquired in the days when boxing flourished in this city. Donaldson and Patsy Cardiff, the latter himself a fighter of considerable local reputation, where associated in the saloon and fight promoting business and Donaldson was financially interested in practically every bout pulled off in Minneapolis during several years. Such men as Cardiff, George Harris (The Black Pearl), "Baby" Barnes, Harry McCrossen (Big Mack), Christy Murphy, Spike Trainor, H. T. Smith (The Omaha Giant), Paddy Harrington, Patsy Melen, Professor Charles Haddley, Dick Moore, John P Clow, Charles Kemmeck, Billy Wilson, Merwin Thompson (The Cleveland Thunderbolt), Pat Killen, Oscar Gardner, Jonny Van Heest and Danny Needham were prominent figures in Minneapolis during those days."

John Donaldson:

On 28th May 1880, John Donaldson beat Bluett Boyd in two rounds in a contest fought with hard gloves. This fight had previously been scheduled for 15th May but was stopped by police. Donaldson weighed 181 pounds, and his opponent weighed 205 pounds, described as a well-built fellow of considerable experience.

On 13th August 1880, John Donaldson beat James Taylor. This was a light-gloved boxing match, and was fought at 2am by torchlight in front of a crowd of 200 people. Taylor was knocked down 5 times and retired.

On 24th December 1880, John L Sullivan beat John Donaldson by 10th round retirement in a fight with small hard gloves. Donaldson was either knocked down or went down at the end of every round, and was clearly no match for Sullivan.

On 15th June 1881, Charles AC Smith beat John Donaldson by 4th round KO.

On 14th November 1882, Charles AC Smith drew with John Donaldson over 4 rounds.

On 28th August 1885, Patsy Cardiff drew with John Donaldson on points over 4 rounds.

On 1st October 1885, Patsy Cardiff beat John Donaldson on points over 4 rounds.

On 28th September 1889, James J Corbett beat John Donaldson on points over 4 rounds.

 

Jackson Knocked Goddard down in round 2 and then again the next round in round 3 after a tame first round. The only knockdown of Jackson came when they fell together tangled up. Both went down together this happens often in fights. Goddard finished with more stamina. But Jackson won the fight Goddard hit the deck multiple times. What do you want from the guy he ran out of time...Goddard was a tough fighter.

In no way shape or form was Jackson dominated by Goddard. Goddard had the better of some of the last rounds of a scheduled 8.

Saying Jackson didn't even beat Goddard. He totally whipped him to start the fight. He gassed out it happens when you aren't fighting regularly

Several Newspapers fail to mention the fact that Jackson had multiple knockdowns you need to dig deep..in researching. I found many giving a skewed version of the fight. A round by round account of the fight had the details of the knockdowns. Meaning the author of the newspaper article was actually present at the fight, instead of repeating a press release of others. I am a master researcher I know how to spot inaccuracies in press release's (newspaper accounts) I've read hundred's of fights reports. You need to cross reference everything you're reading for inaccuracies. This fight has some very skewed accounts of what actually happened.

 

From The Hay Standard:
"GLOVE CONTEST.
Jackson v. Goddard,
Melbourne. Tuesday.
The glove contest between Peter Jackson and Joe Goddard took place last night. The fight was declared a draw, but it is generally considered the contest ended in favor of Goddard,

In the fight between Jackson and Goddard last night, the latter forced the fighting from the beginning, and got in several stinging body blows, while Jackson nearly closed one of Goddard's eyes. The excitement at the eight round was very high, when it became evident that Goddard had a very strong lead, and looked like winning. Nine out of every ten in the hall anticipated a decision in favor of Goddard, but the judges held divided opinions, and as the referee refused to decide, the contest was declared a draw."

From The Age out of Melbourne:

The decided advantage which Goddard obtained in the fourth round coupled with the aggressive tactics he pursued throughout, led nine out of every 10 people in the hall to anticipate a decision in favor of Goddard, but the two judges held opposite opinions, and as the referee refused to decide one way or the other he declared the contest a draw. It was evident towards the close that had the fight been to a finish Goddard would have had at least an equal chance of victory, and the result of the battle has left a very decided impression that another match between the same men would excite more actual interest than the projected meeting of Jackson and Slavin, good judges agreeing that Jackson would have to greatly improve upon last night's display to have any chance against the annihilator of McAliffe.

 

Again some skewed reports. I've seen all those. Still Jackson dropped him twice in first 3 rounds. Goddard finished strong which led to the "Goddard got the better of the fight". Most reports weren't aware of Goddard being dropped multiple times. The earliest reports are often the most inaccurate. They repeat a narrative of the first release. The round by round account took a few days to appear. For instance the round by round of Godfrey vs Jackson took a whole week for the first actual round by round account of the fight. Way after the initial wave of reporting. I just researched it.

The 4th round on is key in the report because they fail to mention he was dropped in the 2 previous rounds. As I stated Jackson gassed out. Goddard still didn't win every round past the 4th either as Jackson rebounded after taking it easy for a few.

A draw was a fair verdict in my mind. Under modern scoring for knockdowns Goddard would have lost.

In no way shape or form should Jackson's performance be viewed as a negative. He dominated him in the beginning as was expected.

The nine out of 10 people claimed Goddard won is sensationalism being displayed by the press & highly inaccurate. I read it too but different newspapers tell a different story. This happens often on the early press releases (close to the actual fight date) You need to understand most of the people writing a column weren't at the actual fight. Which is why you need a round by round account the only way to get that info is to be in attendance. Hence why facts get skewed.

A prime example of how the facts are skewed is the fact that they mention the Goddard knockdown in several newspaper accounts (early on). ONLY in the round by round account do you later find out that they fell together to the grass. Clearly painting a very inaccurate viewpoint. Because they (the press) is just repeating what they hear as they weren't in attendance in many cases.

I've read many accounts were a fighter knocked this guy out of the ring. If you stop there you think okay that dude got his ass kicked. Only to read another report a week later were the guy was clearly pushed out of the ring. Giving a very skewed viewpoint of what actually happened. I know all the tricks they do at this point. I'm hundred's of fights deep. Sometimes the original reporting is accurate.

The most skewed report I ever read was a manager giving the newspaper editor his version of the fight. Which had him winning. Dozens of newspapers report the guy winning. Only to find a week or 2 later they rescinded the original report & the other guy won the fight. Sometimes there can be an "agenda" with the reporting. That was an extreme case.

 

I'll just ask all open ended and shiz


Who TF was LW John L Sullivan?

https://boxrec.com/en/box-pro/216598


edit- maybe not LHW? I saw him in a paper for Harry Gilmore in 1884, went to Harry's boxrec, found the man. But boxrec has 120s, which tracks for Harry. I probably misread the paper. They are sometimes a bit bold and smudgey. Thought it said light heavy but probably just said lightweight. My B. Anyone if youse know about the smaller sully. I'm just interested. You see lots of dempsey's and ganses and such, neat to see a sully.

 

My reports have Goddard slipping in 4th. There seemed to be a lot of rough stuff including an elbow to Goddard's eye.

I don't follow how the latter reports can, by definition, be more accurate in a time of no filmed contests. It seems those would be more susceptible to doctoring than the next day accounts.

And as a note, Goddard and Jackson were good friends, having trained together, and were caught having a right ripper in a bar the next day.