A historians take on the lack of Sullivan's opponents making the cut as the best ( 1920 )

I have said before Sullivan didn't beat anyone of historical note in a gloved boxing match aside from Charlie Mitchel, who was small and without a much of a punch. The fact that Corbett blitzed the same early and did so without being floored takes some of the luster off the win.

Some in the past have cried cry foul, oh what do you know about his opponents? Well, I can see their age, size, and ring records for a start, but the kicker is the people covering boxing will tell you his best win is likely Mitchell as I have said and the others he did not fight were better than Mitchell. Ergo, he didn't fight and beat the top competition. I list Al Crafty's picks a person covering boxing since the 1880's. He was there, we were not. The information below is a revelation. The fighters I put in yellow Sullivan did not fight, and are judged here as being better than ANYONE he beat.

Alfred Reed Cratty, who wrote as Jim Jab, was writing sports in Pittsburgh as far back as 1883, possibly even earlier.



1920-12-06 The Pittsburg Press (page 20)
JIM JAB PICKS TWENTY BEST IN RING SPORT
--------
By Jim Jab.

Autumn's tradition of picking all-American gridiron squads, has extended to other rugged recreations. Fistiana couldn't escape the racket. A down easterner delved in the game, finally emerging with a "Twenty Best." A score of this clan was credited to yesteryear and an equal number to modern mixing. The guesser awards Dempsey with being the "boss ever," puts Fitz seconds, Jeffries third, J. A. Johnson fourth, Sullivan fifth. If the prophet wanted to get a "rise" out of the old-timers he couldn't have planned better. Chances are that his estimate was formed mostly on hear-talk, that is the so-called symposium was culled on somebody else's say so. The writer begs leave to dissent with the selections. By way of qualification how's the following? Have "lamped" Sully in his prime; watched him in hostile settos, peeked at Peter Jackson going his best; eyed Jim Jeffries slinging hard leather, scanned Dempsey hitting his finest, gazed at Peter Maher, Frank Slavin, Ruby Fitz, J. Willard, F. Fulton, Jim Corbett; looked over glove stars for four decades.



In the writer's mind, no heavyweight in American ring history was better than Jim Jeffries, California giant. Stalwart, compact, cool and calculating, this magnificent athlete was a marvelous hitter, cruel only when cruelty was needed. The view is ventured that the annals of the mit pastime do not show Jeffries' peer. Under Tommy Ryan's tutelage Jeffries became clever to the echo. Withal this enchantment of science, there came no slackening in swatting prowess. Usually when a natural battler is taught fancy flings of fistic art he suffers in striking skill. Dempsey is classy, Sullivan was great, Fitzsimmons marvelous, Jackson way up, Johnson artful and crafty, Slavin game and gritty, Ruhlin excellent, a wonder in elbow work. In their day and generation these warriors blazed the trail with brilliant bouts. Of course they didn't score brackets in all frays. However, they were capable clashers.



EASTERN SAGE'S CHOICES.

Current rankings at press time. Dec 1920. To aid the argument let us reprint the eastern sage's ranking roster. Here goes. The up-to-date command: Jack Dempsey, No. 1; Wills, 2; Willard, 3; McVey, 4; Fulton, 5; Langford, 6; Norfolk, 7; Brennan, 8; Carpentier, 9; Moran, 10; Tate, 11; Ropper, 12; Martin, 13; Tunney, 14; Reich, 15; Weinert, 16; Madden, 17; Jim Coffey, 18; Beckett, 19; Tom Cowler, 20.


The all-time list: No. 1, Dempsey; No. 2, Fitzsimmons; No. 3, Jeffries; No. 4, Jack Johnson; No. 5, Sullivan;

This content is protected

No. 7, Corbett; No. 8, McCoy; No. 9, Langford; No. 10,

This content is protected

No. 12, Sharkey; No. 13, Gus Ruhlin; No. 14, Joe Choynski; No. 15, Joe Jeannette; No. 16, Luther McCarthy; No. 17, Jess Willard; No. 18, Jack Dillon; No. 19, Sam McVey; No. 20, Tommy Burns.

Note: Not one Sullivan victory listed. Interesting picks,I think. I agree Jeannette was better than Mcvey, and McCarty who was taken before he hit his peak was better than Willard.


Now for THE PRESS revise--Today's chieftains: No. 1, Jack Dempsey; No. 2, Kid Norfolk; No. 3, Fred Fulton; No. 4, Jess Willard; No. 5, Harry Wills; No. 6, Jack Johnson; No. 7, Bill Brennan; No. 8, Sam Langford; No. 9, Charley Weinert; No. 10, Sam McVey; No. 11, Frank Moran; No. 12, Tom Gibbons; No. 13, Mike O'Dowd; No. 15, Gene Tunney; No. 16, Bill Miske; No. 17, Bob Martin; No. 18, Georges Carpentier; No. 19, Jack Thompson; No. 20, Al Reich.



The All American team of 40 years plus: No. 1, James J. Jeffries; No. 2, John L. Sullivan; No. 3, J. Art Johnson; No. 4, Jack Dempsey; No. 5, Bob Fitzsimmons;

This content is protected

No. 7, Jess Willard; No.

This content is protected

No. 9, Fred Fulton; No. 10, Gus Ruhlin; No.

This content is protected

No. 12, Tom Sharkey; No. 13, Sam Langford; No. 14, Luther McCarthy; No. 15, Jim Corbett; No. 16,

This content is protected

No. 17, Joe Choynski; No.

This content is protected

No. 19, Sam McVey; No. 20, Joe Jeannette.

Note: In all of the rankings, only one Sullvian victory is mentioned at its

This content is protected

Personally I think Goddard was the better heavyweight, bit okay, my point is proven. The people in yellow Sullivan did not fight.

Sullivan barred a fight with Jackson, did not fight Slavin either. Did not fight Goddard, Maher or Gofdrey either, but anyone one of these guys would be probably his 3rd best opponent and if he won, 2nd best win Sure, argue he was shot too soon, the fight could not be made, etc...

My points:

1 ) They were active when he was still champion and he didn't fight them,

2 ) They rank higher then the men he did fight.

 

I think I proved that Sullivan's best win hardy rate. Can we achieve common ground here?

Slavin was active, and so was Jackson. Sullivan ducked them both! Richard K Fox wanted Slavin vs Sullivan before Corbett entered the ring to face Sullivan.

I have a book we can view on line to shed some light on the topic, and I think you'll enjoy it.

Strong Boy: The Life and Times of John L. Sullivan, America's First Sports Hero
By Christopher Klein

See page 190:

Jackson sailed to the USA trying to get a match with Sullivan 1888. You said Sullivan was active in 1888 and 1889, so this fight could have been made for sure.

See page 195:

Australian's desperately wanted to see Sullivan face one of their native sons be it Jackson, Slavin or Goddard, and some questioned his manhood for not facing them.

[url]https://books.google.com/books?id=b_JABAAAQBAJ&pg=PA198&lpg=PA198&dq=slavin+vs+sullivan+richard+k+fox&source=bl&ots=8AdSb7XyCC&sig=ACfU3U14S_2I3rYUAJQtsR9iDQhroEXPGw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjYrLvljvHlAhVEOKwKHUoZBoYQ6AEwB3oECAoQAQ#v=onepage&q=slavin vs sullivan richard k fox&f=false[/url]

Thumbing though this book...There probably lots of stuff to read.

 

So old timer Madden goes off the deep end, the trouble is Sullivan himself said he would have no chance vs. Jeffries.

I don't disagree with Thompson who used the word could, but all the people he mentioned beat better competition in comparison to Sullivan, so they could have beaten him too.

And of course Peter Jackson, Jim Corbett, Frank Slavin, Bob Fitzsimmons, or Jack Johnson were far better than anyone Sullivan beat. Anyone of these four could have beaten Sullivan in his prime too. While I do think Sullivan fought better fighter in the mid 1880's, he often took them the distance. Where is the power and skills?

 

janitor says: ]Somebody has to be the top contender in 1881, 1882, 1883, 1884, 1885, 1886, 1887, 1888 etc.

There is no such thing as a year where there is no top contender.

The overwhelming public demand in 1888 was for Sullivan to fight Killrain in a bare knuckle contest.

This fight was necessary to unify the last outstanding title claim.

Sullivan retired after the Killrain fight, and Richard K Fox recognized Jackson Slavin as being for the vacant title.

Sullivan demanded $25 000 to come out of retirement, and neither Jackson nor Slavin could get it.

In the end Sullivan came out of retirement to fight the man who held Jackson to a draw, when the asking price was produced, and was confident enough of winning that he bet his entire purse on himself!

I think that you would find Adam Pollack's second biography much more instructive.

Sullivan was the champion and they were the challengers, so the onus was on them to come to America to fight him.

You can make a good case that Sullivan ducked Jackson, but Slavin not so much.

This content is protected

 

>>> I cannot see the age, size, and known rings records of the people Sullivan fought? Wrong.