Jeffries v Sullivan

If I recall these two actually sparred two rounds after Jeffries won the title. Out of respect, I believe, Jeffries said 'He [Sullivan] is still the king of kings."

IMO, a prime Sullivan would have beaten Jim Corbett. If the old, out of shape, drunken Sullivan could go 21 rounds with Corbett, where 20 out of the 21 rounds he was getting his head beaten in, I think the prime Sullivan would have beaten Corbett.

Sullivan/Jeffries however, what a match! Two guys who ate pain like it was candy, could go on forever if they wanted to, were not easily muscled around in the ring...it would have been a brawl for the ages, something from out of the Coliseum in Rome...I would lean towards Jeffries winning it by KO late, depending on how many rounds we're talking here, or none given at all...but by God, Jeffries would have been badly beaten up in the process of doing so.

Edit- You stated 20 rounds with gloves. It goes the distance, Jeffries winning on points over Sullivan.

 

Great post. The brutality level would go past 11-- for sure this would be a bloody affair.

 

Around the time Jeffries retired this was the single most discussed fantasy fight.

Sort of like Dempsey vs Louis when Louis retired or Louis vs Ali when Ali retired.

Looking back on the debate we see many of the same trends observed in fantasy fight debates on this forum.

The younger crowd argued that Jeffries was too big and strong for Sullivan and that he represented an evolutionary advance in both technique and physical dimensions. Little were they to know that the future genaration of great heavyweights would be more the size of Sullivan than Jeffries and that it would be another 70 years before an all time great with the physical parameters of Jeffries would emerge.

The old school crowd argued that Sullivan was tougher and fought in a less gentle era that Jeffries might not be able to adap to.

 

Quite a statement janitor, I commend you!

 

Cheers mate.

I will write more on how this match might pan out later.

 

Sullivan to me has a legand the size of the Empire State Building, but his resume and some results are is lacking.

When Sullivan and Jeffries sparred Sullvian called Jeffries the fastest big man he ever saw when they sparred, and was in similar awe as a sports writer watching Jeffries do road work and train for his 1910 come back fight.

I think Jeffries resume of wins towers over Sullivans. Jeffries was 6-0 vs Corbett, Fitzsimmons, and Sharkey. If Sullivan fought these three men twice each he would surely lose his share.

Jeffries is bigger, faster, more skilled, taller, longer, had a better chin, and probably did everything better than Sullvian, with the exception of right hand slugging.

Corbett was an ego centric man. He fought both men said Jeffries was the better. Most ego centric fighters say the best fighter is the one they beat, not the one they lost to.


Best guess here is Jeffries vis mid round TKO, which in those day was around the 12th round.

 

Great fight. Even though their only twenty years apart, I'd give Jeffries a little advantage if they're time machined together, Sullivan a little advantage if they come along at the same time.

I'm inclined to think Sullivan, at his best (mid-'81 to mid '83), was the quicker of the two.

vs. Corbett, Fitzsimmons and Sharkey. I don't think Jeffries really peaked until about '03; five of these contests were before then, and I'm very impressed that Jeffries won them all. I do think that the first Corbett and second Sharkey fight were about even after twenty rounds.

I think Sharkey would have been Sullivans meat. Ditto the Corbett of '03. Corbett of '00 might have beaten Sullivan, and '99 and '02 Fitzsimmons might have beaten Sullivan. I'd favor Sullivan in all these fights but, in three fights, I don't know that I'd favor Sullivan to win them all.
Then, too, though I think Jawn is all wrong for Sharkey -- did Jeffries have a bum left arm in '99? Would John L, with a bum arm, have beaten Sharkey? I think he could have -- but it's no sure thing.

 

My take on the fight.

Sometimes with a match like this with so many uncertainties it is more useful to tell people what is going through your mind than to attempt to make a prediction. Here are the key factors as I see them:

Rule set
In most respects Sullivan would have been more suited to a modern rule set than Jeffries. He fought in an era when most states limited boxing matches to 4 or 6 rounds and while 2-4oz gloves were normal some states mandated 8 oz gloves. In many of his fights Sullivan was contracted to finish his opponent off inside 4 rounds or forfeit sums ranging from $50 to $1000. Having said that he also fought some finish fights under London Prize Ring Rules that lasted two or three hours so his ability to fight over the duration cannot be denied. Jeffries for contrast built his career around fights ranging from 20 to 45 rounds. The 20 round fights were a considerable test of stamina while the 45 round fights were essentially finish fights in all but name. Jeffries fought with 4 oz gloves for the most part.

In summary I would say that Sullivan was a fighter who specialised in short fights where a quick knockout was imperative while Jeffries specialised in longer fights where he could take his time to wear down his opponent. On the other hand it cannot be taken for granted that Jeffries would hold the edge in stamina due to Sullivan’s proven record in finish fights.

Competition
It is fair to say that Jeffries fought a much higher calibre of opposition. Jeffries title reign included defences against other great fighters like Fitzsimmons, Sharkey and Corbett. At the time his title opposition was regarded as being better than that of previous eras and it continued to be viewed as being a golden era up to the post-war era.

Sullivan’s prime coincided with one of the weakest eras in the history of the heavyweight division. The top challengers of that period were seen at the time as being much weaker than the best fighters of the previous era when Jem Mace was champion. They would later be seen to be weaker than the top fighters who came along late in Sullivan’s reign such as Killrain, Jackson and Corbett.

Having said that Sullivan was far more dominant as champion than Jeffries. He was not just beating the best around at his peak he was going through them like a young Mike Tyson. He contracted to knock out some of the top elite of the period in 4 rounds or less or forfeit $1000 and he was doing it easily.

I would say that the only fighters Sullivan faced who were as good as the top fighters of Jeffries resume were Corbett (obviously) and Killrain. Sullivan opponents like Charlie Mitchell and Dominick McCaffrey might be on the level of somebody like Joe Choynski.

Style
Both these guys fought out of a crouch and were fearsome two handed punchers but that is about where the similarity ends.

Sullivan was an offensive attacking fighter in the mould of Jack Dempsey and Floyd Patterson. Probably the nearest thing to him you will find on film is somebody like Terry McGovern. Above all Sullivan was a finisher in a different class to Jeffries. He came out of his corner from the opening bell looking for a knockout. He used head movement to avoid punishment and was methodical in placing his blows. He seems to have been able to target areas like the chin, solar plexus, neck and bellow the ear with considerable precision. His pet punch was a blow to the jugular.

Jeffries was a methodical fighter who broke his opponents down and generally took his time to do it. Despite his reliance on his size and durability he was cat quick on his feet and had the reflexes of a rattlesnake. He sometimes made opponents miss punches by a couple of inches by pulling his head back like Muhammad Ali. In the second Sharkey fight he switched from an orthodox stance to a southpaw stance because his left was out of action. Despite his method involving breaking opponents down, he did develop into a good finisher later in his career.

Firepower
This is the hardest area to compare.

In terms of power we cannot say who hit harder but it is fairly certain that Sullivan was the superior puncher and above all the superior finisher. Both fighters could carry their power late.

In terms of durability I have to give the edge to Jeffries. Jeffries was never knocked off his feet before his ill fated comeback and probably fought more big punchers. Sullivan suffered a flash knockdown against Charlie Mitchell which could be compared to Jeffries hypothetically being knocked down by Choyinsky.

In terms of physical parameters Jeffries was the bigger man. Jeffries was 6’ 1’’ and weighed in at 220lbs. He would probably have been a squat super heavyweight today at 230 lbs or more. Sullivan was 5’ 11’’ and weighed 190 lbs+ for LPR fights and about 200-230 for gloved contests. He was sometimes reported as being in the pink of condition (to the untrained eye) at 220-230 lbs. My guess is that he was naturally bigger than Dempsey and Marciano.

In terms of physical strength an wrestling ability I have to give a clear edge to Jeffries because he is known to have fought world class wrestlers on equal or near equal terms.

 

Excellent analysis janitor!

 

Another great post, janitor! Thanks! :good

 

Cheers guys!!

 

Sullivan was the faster, sharper and likely harder one punch hitter. Both had great chins and stamina ... I like Sullivan ...

 

Hmmmmmm.... Jim Jeffries was a hulk who could fight and punch......... Jeffries was over 6' tall and a solid 220 pounds in his prime..... Jeffries had a knack for eating up smaller dudes...... I rate Jim Jeffries as a top-5 all-time heavyweight champion from 1887 to 1960........ I cannot envision the 1887 John L. Sullivan at 5' 10" tall and a fit 193 pounds beating the massive but capable Jim Jeffries of 1901....... Jeffries by KO.....

MR.BILL

 

Janitor, great post.

Now pick a winner.