John L Sullivan v MIke Spinks?

http://www.opal-online.org/Flagler20090208/

Start at 3:50 in.

 

Right, and how does a 2 or 4 oz glove style compare to 8oz? The difference in style is HUGE. I didn't know that they were 4 round fights though. Amazing that he only weighed 190lbs for such short bouts.

Yeah, i guess those crude unskilled brawlers we see Johnson fight all have Mayweather-esque skills if we saw the film in better quality. Amazing that every jab, combination and piece of footwork happened in those missing frames.

Yes, but there is a difference between fighting from a leaning back/crouch with your hands by your waiste and your wild imagination reading that as "oh, he's a cross breed of Patterson and Dempsey".


You make ther rather condescending asumption that every observer of this period was either biased or stuid.[/quote]

 

I think the biggest difference here, in the glove sizes is that with less padding, it makes speed more important than power. This means that weights and sizes of the bigger fighters are less of an advantage. I think this is because (imo) less power will be needed to do knockout damage and timing and speed to land properly is much more important. I think it means that light heavyweights (as an example) would be much better as heavyweights with the smaller gloves than with the heavier gloves.

By logic, this would suggest that John L, may not have been quite the same fighter and had the same powerful shots with bigger gloves (though he may have still retained the close to the same power, which is speculative). I think the effect is far less for fighters going the other way, although you may have to factor in the brittle hands theory. Tyson for example broking his hand with one knockout punch or combination on Mitch Green (bare knuckle). This may hinder his performance with smaller gloves. I dont think that added power to punch would help many modern fighters because they are already so big and strong that they power is not a problem anyway, and they would be getting hit much harder by smaller fighters. Chris Byrd for example, probably wouldnt have any trouble hurting fighters when he landed. A Byrd Vlad fight would be much closer with the small gloves.

Have you had a look at the video posted on one of the other threads around here which shows vlad fighting on a simulated older camera. It is interesting viewing and while quality is still much better than the older cameras showed, it does give a decent indication of what some of his fighters are like.

It is a mistake to also to assume that one fighter (sullivan) uses the same style as another fighter who happens to be filmed (Fitzsimmons?). Sullivan is actually interesting, as i my understanding (and i havent researched this at all and may be proved wrong by others in the know) is that he fought with a high guard, with both hands rotating from chin to nose, (presumable to give the constant impression that he is feinting with his lefts and rights), i always thought his weight was more on his back foot than his front but maybe that is not correct.

The placing of the weight on the back foot is interesting. I think that the theory is that it gives a stronger position to launch forward from and not be pushed back. This helps gain advantage in the clinch, which is the biggest change between the eras, imo. It is also a change which would suggest that earlier fighters have a massive advantage against modern fighters who have not been trained in this area. Similar to the advantage a kick boxer would have against a boxer. It doesnt mean they win, just that all things being equal, they have an advantage.

Anyway, the other point about the back foot stance which is overlooked, is that it changes the jab from a scoring jab like Ali, to a power jab like Foremans. Personally i would never use the style, but it is possible that there are some advantages to it.

You make ther rather condescending asumption that every observer of this period was either biased or stuid.[/quote][/quote]

 

Link? I'm very interested, I've wondered about this.

 

Would Sullivan even get in the ring with Spinx? wasnt this the man who said "I never fought a negro and I never shall". There is film of an Old Sullivan fooling around, but he looks to me like he had very good feints, and packed quite a punch.

 

He did say that but like many of the colour bar champions he made conflicting statments at diferent stages of his career.

I dont think it is necisarily impossible to get a younger Sulivan in the ring with a black challenger.

 

It is under the thread titled what if? on this page or the page before.

 

No, smaller gloves don't require less power for a knockout. They certainly hurt more, cause more superficial damage like cuts, bruises and broken bones but for a pure knockout, an 8 oz glove will do just fine, because all energy is put in twisting the head which is what causes the knockout.

TKO's are much more likely of course, but the fact that many of Sullivan's bouts were 4 rounds compensates for that, as does the fact they people back then were ****ing sadists who would only stop the fight when you had one foot in your casket.

But the biggest difference is:
-Defence: glove blocking (covering up) is very ineffective
-Body shots are more effective.
-More superficial damage + less defence + biggest chance of breaking your hands means few combinations

Especially the first reason brings about a GREAT change in style, and is why you see them stand like ******s, leaning back with their hands by their waste, and why you see Jack Johnson peddle like a dog with his fists out there, because covering up isn't effective.

He would've been a powerful dude with any glove size.

Byrd's problem was not that he lacked power, his problem was that he couldn't lay a glove on Wlad.

Yes i've seen them. And for some reason they don't turn into hands low, combination less half boxers half wrestlers (according to janitor the opposite happens, anyway).

It's not calling them stupid, but it's realistic in interpreting their assessment based on what they know.

A guy from the 1000's would call lightning a punishment from God. Put Benjamin Franklin in a chair today and ask him how to install a Windows Update or explain the double slit experiment using Quantum Theory. Neither of them knows, but does that make either of them stupid? Of course not, but it doesn't make them less oblivious to what knowledge we have now, and their lack of knowledge affects their judgment.

 

I am prepared to asume that Benjamin Franklin could give a fairly reliable description of the fighting stance of a boxer a few yards away from him.

 

And i'm fairly sure that a creative mind like you reads "a hybrid of Dempsey and Patterson" when he's referring to a semi-bare knuckle boxer who happens to come from low, which you can say about just about any boxer.

 

I think you underestimate how detailed the descriptions of Sullivans styleare, and how many of them coroborate eachother.

There are dozens if not hundreds of eye witness descriptions of Sullivans style. There is enough detail out there that we could practiacaly build a copy of the man from the ground up.

When I have a bit more time I will write a detailed breakdown of his style providing contemporary sources to coroborate everything I say about it.

 

So, you stand by your statement that, despite it being completely unsuiting to boxing back then, Sullivan fought in a style that was a good fit for boxing with large gloves, limited number of rounds, etc? And that despite what would be an extremely uncommon style, he isn't known as a revolutionary in style nor known as an unorthodox fighter, just a very strong and durable brawler who got thoroughly outclassed by Corbett. In fact, Dempsey is known as the revolutionary. I think you can guess why.