How great was John L Sullivan ?

Whenever I even try to compare and rate him to and against those men I tend to end up doing this:

This content is protected

So, I've left him unrated, for my own lists. Apparently though he ate lightning, crapped thunder, was 12 feet tall and women said he was extraordinarily well endowed, if they were still capable of speech. :conf

 

I would type out a serviceable response but it seems i'm having issues uncorking my right. please excuse me.

 

Great fighter of his day but certainly no Boston Tom Mc Moustache

 

More has been forgotten about this great man than we will ever know.

Some report he had over thirty successful defences and knocked out over 200 men.

Some say he had no defences and knocked out nowhere near as many.

I don't buy into this whole progressionist crap in terms of boxing and I don't see anyone having an easy night with him.

He sits proudly at number 14 on my list.

 

I think his knockout loss to corbet was similar to foreman's knockout loss to ali in that he gassed after chasing and pounding... The difference being we're talking about a thirty something sullivan in his final recorded professional fight.

 

I don't think Corbett was that 'featherfisted' or 'weak-chinned' as well, he went 61 with Peter Jackson under a swarming assault and that guy was a prodigious puncher. As far as accounts of his fights go it sounds like he was doing a lot of hurt as well. You couldn't be truly featherfisted in that era and get anywhere IMO.

 

Great talent, great fighter after Billy Madden straightened out his punches mid-1891. Explosve puncher, fast hands, fine stamina when he could be pained to train, not easy to hit, solid chin, fair foot speed, agressive but good temprament (not prone to frustration). About average technician -- liked to affect a scorn of technique.
Now, I'm talking circa 1880's standards ..... I don't think Sullivan, just as he stood c. 1882, would have defeated most of his great successors; I think, if he'd come along at a later time and developed in analogy to how he developed in his own time, he'd be a threat for anyone.

I think, maybe mid 1883, Sullivan got a bit tired of training, took a 'I'll train if I need to' attitude, and slacked off a bit. After the broken left arm against Cardiff (1987), I think Sullivan might have been a bit over reliant on his right; Sullivan became terribly ill after his Chantilly bout against Charlie Mitchell, and there was much speculation whether he could fully recover. For his finish fight against Kilrain, Sullivan was willing to train seriously, and suprised observers with his endurance.
After a half year of post-Kilrain legal battles, Sullivan commenced a 2 year period of theatrical touring during which it would be no exaggeration to say he was almost continually drunk. The Sullivan who fought Corbett was winded after a couple rounds; many observers, including some of Corbett's corner, thought Jim could have finished it after about eight rounds, but Jim played it cautious, KO'ing Sullivan in the 21st. Taking nothing from Corbett, I think it's fair to say that Sullivan was, at that time, a shell of his former self.

 

Corbett pounded him for many rounds before the stopage and Sullivan took it all ... when he was stopped he was exhausted and hit with well over a dozen flush shots ..

AS far as John L. goes you cannot compare him to even the post Corbett greats as he really was not a M of Q fighter in any sense ... what we can say was he had exceptional physical gifts from right hand power (Choynski said Sulliivan was a much bigger puncher than he was) to terrific hand speed to great stamina, a terrific chin and unquestioned heart ... if Sullivan was trained as a professional boxer he could have been a terror in a Dempsey/Marciano/Frazier mold ...