John L Sullivan vs Bob Fitzsimmons

John L. was much faster and harder hitting than Sharkey. Choyski fought them all and said no one hit close to Sullivan.

Look that the major troubles Corbett had with Sharkey. Prime for Prime Sullivan would have broken him in half.

I'm not romantising John L. I truly believe he had the raw materials to be one of the greatest pre-1970's heavyweights of them all if he trained properly. His power was exceptional as was his speed, his chin and his stamina. His heart as well. He simply was never even trained ... imagine if ?

 

You twice mentioned the height advantage ,but with Fitz at 5 11 3/4, and Sullivan at 5 10 1/2, I dont see much advantage.

 

One observation CT

Sullivan wa quite an aggresive boxer would he not try to lead against Fitzsimmons after his feints rather than feinting and waiting

 

Fitzsimmons also fought like a taller man, while Sullivan bent over a bit. His stance also allowed him to lean back a lot because of the way he placed and weighted his feet:

This content is protected

 

Yes.

I must have been somewhat unclear in my post; I meant that he'd use his feints to create an opening and then lead off with the right.

 

ah ok got ya

but couldnt his aggresion be his downfall as Fitzsimmons had the skills, accuracy and power to KO him as he came in

 

It definitely could; Fitz seems to like counter-lunges to set up his short right and left hands on the inside, and it would be easy to envisage a scenario where he times Sullivan and nails him with one of them.

That's why I think that a lot of this hinges on how good Sullivan is at faking Fitz out before he strikes.

 

good points, but i just feel Fitz has to land some counters on him some time and will Sullivan take them shots. basically as McGrain says below

 

Enjoyed your analysis, cross_trainer.

I agree with HE Grant that Sullivan, considered as a pugilistic nature, was of a very high order.

 

Well, he was hit by Mike Cleary:
http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/cleary-mike.htm

Then there are Lannon and Cardiff, who were big strong guys:
http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/cardiff-patsy.htm
http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/lannon-joe.htm

(So were Ryan, Slade, and Taylor)


Kilrain was a pretty good puncher, though the LPR contest he entered with Sullivan wasn't the ideal venue to knock out his opponent:

http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/kilrain.htm


On the other hand, he got knocked down by middleweight Charlie Mitchell (admittedly a great P4P puncher).

 

No. Fitz had scary power.

But Mitchell probably had a very different style than Fitz. Perhaps we shouldn't immediately decide "Mitchell could knock him down, so Fitzsimmons could" or something similar. It was a flash knockdown and the only one of Sullivan's career (non bareknuckled) aside from Corbett's knockout via accumulation.

That being said, I like Fitz's chin better than Sullivan's in this encounter. On the other hand, Sullivan is the faster puncher and at least as hard a hitter.

Stylistically, I'd bet on Fitzsimmons. But I suspect if there was a gun to my head I'd pick the 10-year champion with thirty pounds on his opponent and fast, hard-hitting punches.

 

Fitz did have the type of power that if he caught anybody flush they would go. an dhe ahd them body shots which can take anybody out.

Add that he has the style to defeat a swarmer is the recipe for disaster IMO