That fight was the end of Sharkey's prime. Jeffries ruined him over 25 rounds, Sharkey was never the same.
Mendoza: Show me these quotes in context, and keep in mind what they said early in their career does NOT trump what they said later. What they say later or last is the measuring stick. This ought to be fun. Let' see those quotes This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected Mendoza: I asked to see where people said Choynski hit them the hardest. You duck the question. Sam Langford was floored many times but hardly ever stopped. If you consider who he fought Sharkey has a top chin and plenty of heart. I would not exactly call Chuck Wepner a puncher. He floored Ali. Wepner's KO % is only 32.69. Sonny Banks had 14 Kp's in 25 fight, not really a puncher. Which class guy did he stop? None. His record of KO's are over journeyman or worse.
Not really .. the first dime was before Jeffries and Fitz was crushing him till he got robbed .. Fitz was a bad ass .. it was a triangle of styles like how Hagler could not take out Duran while Hearns crushed him but then Hagler crushed Hearns .. all styles ..
His power is without question . The man flattened or hurt everyone .. he flattened Johnson, he decked Fitz badly, he hit Jeffries as hard as anyone other than Fitz (maybe) .. he was a freak puncher, a guy 168 or so that could crush it like a Julian Jackson .. now imagine how hard a prime Sullivan must have hit when Choynski , who saw Sullivan live , wrote that Sullivan was a much faster and harder hitter than he was .. I question John L's level of opposition as a M of Q fighter but there is n doubt that he was a phenom when it came to natural abilities in his brief prime .. his speed and right hand power were astonishing .
You lost me. A triangle of styles would mean Duran beats Hagler. He didn't Hagler simply won and gave Roberto too much respect. A better example of a triangle would be Frazier beats Ali...Foreman beats Frazier...Ali Beats Foreman. The swarmer bets the boxer, the puncher beats the swarmer, the boxer beats the puncher. There is your triangle. Freak punchers, any of them should have a high KO %. Choynski simply doesn't not even vs the tier two guys. Why? Choynski was lucky to draw, with Fitz. He was saved from a KO by police interference after being down a few times, and nearly out. "Had Fitzsimmons agreed to articles originally framed, which stipulated that a decision must be given, he would probably have fared better, but he insisted that the articles should be to the effect that unless there was a knockout the bout must be called a draw." As for Sullivan's speed, somehow I doubt he moved as quickly as Choynski did, but I do think he was puncher in a land of next to none, Sullivan knocked guys out. We agree his opposition was on the weak and small side.
I know this has escaped you ,but Sullivan was a big man,[ for his times ,]for the most part ,hitting smaller men,Choynski was a small man hitting on bigger men,
Sharkey was way before his prime the first time he fought Fitz (yeah he had a really short one). Fitz fought Sharkey before the first Jeffries fight, and he was said to have improved immensely between those two fights
No, I was talking about effectiveness of styles and power .. Hagler, a huge KO hitter in his own right at 160 could not stop Duran like Jefferies could not stop Sharkey. Herans , a smaller fighter than Hagler by natural weight, fights the same Duran that Hagler did and ices him like Fitz, a smaller fighter than Jeffries was able to bounce Sharkey all over the floor before having the fight stolen from him by a crooked Earp .. but then H2H, Hagler crushes Hearns and Jeffries ultimately crushes Fitz .. its all about styles .. As far as Choynski goes, the issue I'm referring to is his power and not who was a better fighter H2H. Corbett, Fitz, Johnson, Jeffries all said the guy was a monster puncher. AS far as the comment on Sullivan's speed and power, it was attributed to Choynski and footnoted in Pollack's Sullivan book and also I believe Laforces excellent Choynski Chronicles .. the speed of his right and the power ..
I get what you're saying, BUT Hagler did more really try to stop Duran. The punch that hurts you the most is often the one you don't remember. You hear a thudding noise in your head, sometimes a buzzing sound can be heard afterward, the lights dim a bit ( As far as I've gone ) and then you're out. I've never been knocked out, but I have been caught by hard punch or two that shook me up, and its something like that. By contrast, if you get caught with no mouth guard and a vicious shots forces your teeth through your lip, that's going to hurt, and you're going to remember it. But it wasn't a knockout punch where the lights go out. Choynski simply lacks KO's vs tier two guys. I believe Sharkey, for example, hit harder, Choynski was more accurate. I believe Fitz hit much harder, and he was jus as accurate. If Choynski had power like Fitz, he'd have them falling hard. that is not the case, so this business that Choynski hit the hardest in the times is hopefully gone for now. The following fighters in the 1890's and early 1900's in my opinion hit harder. No particular order. Fitzsimmons Jeffries Sharkey Mcvey Sullivan Maher You could argue McCoy, Jackson, or Goddard. I might be missing one or two more? Matt, any to add? That other slugger from Minnesota ( forget his name ) who had tons of KO's and never meet Sullivan? I think Choynski was more a sharp hitter with speed, he was not KO guy as his records shows. While his testimonial on Sullivan is wonderful, I'd take it with some caution it as there weren't any real big punchers for Choynski to judge against in those days. Sullivan was one of a kind. A puncher in the land of none during the very early phases of gloved boxing. He must have been very impressive. If this were basketball, imagine if only one man what back then could dunk it, boy he'd stand out too. But as time passes fighters get bigger and stronger, just like basketball players and a feat 130 years ago might look far less impressive now.