John L Sullivan vs the all time great heavyweights.

Hi, Janitor

I don't have much time today, but I copied your post and will be looking at it and will try to respond within a few days.

Just off the cuff, I would favor most on your list against the actual Sullivan of mid-1881 thru 1883, if the fight was Quensbury, Just because JLS has to have a technic that can work for both MdQ and LPR, while the others can specialize in MdQ. Also, the later champions have more experience of competition against guys who specialized in MdQ.

However, I do think Sullivan had the capacity to have a winning record against your list. If he came along in each of these guys days, and primed with them, I think he would have a better than .500 record.

Again, not much time today, but I'll try to respond later in more detail.

 

A) 1883 Sullivan vs. opponents -- I'm adding Holyfield -- as they were in their primes (expressed in wins out of 100).

Jim Jeffries -- 55 Jeffries

Jack Johnson -- 60 Johnson

Jack Dempsey -- 65 Dempsey

Gene Tunney -- 65 Tunney

Joe Louis -- 70 Louis

Ezzard Charles -- 50 even

Rocky Marciano -- 70 Marciano

Floyd Patterson -- 50 even

Sonny Liston -- 60 Liston

Muhamad Ali -- 85 Ali

Joe Frazier -- 60 Frazier

George Foreman -- 65 Foreman

Larry Holmes -- 70 Holmes

Mike Tyson -- 65 Tyson

Evander Holyfield -- 60 Holyfield

Lennox Lewis -- 65 Lewis


B) Sullivan-type fighter born into other fighters time.

Jim Jeffries -- 50 even

Jack Johnson -- 55 Sullivan

Jack Dempsey -- 55 Sullivan

Gene Tunney -- 55 Sullivan

Joe Louis -- 55 Louis

Ezzard Charles -- 65 Sullivan

Rocky Marciano -- 55 Sullivan

Floyd Patterson -- 80 Sullivan

Sonny Liston -- 65 Sullivan

Muhamad Ali -- 70 Ali

Joe Frazier -- 60 Sullivan

George Foreman -- 60 Sullivan

Larry Holmes -- 55 Sullivan

Mike Tyson -- 60 Sullivan

Evander Holyfield -- 70 Sullivan

Lennox Lewis -- 65 Sullivan

 

Sorry J ,I would favour All of them over John L,though I think he beats Hart,Burns, Carnera .

 

I have never seen John L fight, and Frankly, I don't think anyone alive today has. Therefore, its a rather moot point to try and compare him to other champions......

 

I think he would do better than most think here is why:

-He fought in a day when a man received credit for a knockout only if he scored a knockout (a fight was stopped by a referee because of an injury such as a broken arm or by the police to prevent a brutal beating - there was no knockout)-thus his record does not speak for itself.

-There were many “No Decision” bouts on his record that should be wins and knockouts by todays rules

This from Cyber boxing historians:

“As a knockout specialist John’s record remains unbeaten. No other fighter in history has left such a trail of broken and aching jaws behind him”.

Tim Scannell, 200-pound competitor, was lifted up and out of the ring by a Sullivan punch. Charlie Mitchell and John Donaldson were also knocked out of the ring.

Boxing Historian Diamond writes about Sullivan – “He was quick on his feet – as quick as any modern heavyweight. And what a punch he had! A knockout in each hand!

He knocked many men “cold” and battered numerous others into helpless submission. John Flood, Paddy Ryan, Jake Kilrain, John Laflin, and Frank Herald were among those who had to be carried from the ring.

He broke jaws and bashed in faces with abandon."

-Most of the destruction Sullivan put on people was "hidden" because it was illegal to fight in public and a KO would land you in jail so he was told not to knock them out.

-Sullivan was the first to use feints and did very well.

-He was an amazing athelete one historian writes: Sullivan had strength, speed, hitting power, fighting instinct, and ring ferocity.

"nuff said.

 

He'd struggle against the modern greats like Lennox lewis and Corrie Sanders.

 

I love this ****.

 

There is no such thing as a neutral rule set. Therefore-

Jim Jeffries: Jefferies by TKO late. A battle of bullish strength in which Jefferies would come out on top.

Jack Johnson: Johnson by TKO. A similar boxing exhibition to the Corbett-Sullivan fight, except Johnson has a strength advantage.

Jack Dempsey: Sullivan by KO. Dempsey was decent but lacked stamina down the stretch; this combined with a vulnerable chin would be fatal against Sullivan.

Gene Tunney: Sullivan by TKO late. Tunney would dominate the early period of the fight but I don't think he could go for the long haul.

Joe Louis: Louis might score an early win within the first 20 rounds, but he'd probably hurt his hands and be finished late.

Ezzard Charles: Sullivan by KO around the second hour. I think Charles could last quite a while.

Rocky Marciano: Sullivan would win due to damage on Marciano's face after about 54 rounds. Rocky would be in it all the time though.

Floyd Patterson: Sullivan by TKO early, ie. within the first 15 rounds or so.

Sonny Liston: Liston has a good shot at stopping Sullivan early, otherwise Sullivan finishes Liston within an hour and a half.

Muhamad Ali: Lacks the power to stop Sullivan early and his technique would tear his own hands to pieces. Sullivan by TKO within 30 rounds.

Joe Frazier: Similar problems to Ali in terms of technique. Has to stop due to bad hands within the first 15 rounds.

George Foreman: Sullivan takes him down the stretch, I suspect. Foreman's technique would not be good without big gloves, since his defence relied on glove blocking but he lacked the dexterity of Jack Johnson. Sullivan by KO within the first hour.

Larry Holmes: Similar situation to Ali.

Mike Tyson: Has a good chance of stopping Sullivan early; otherwise he's likely to quit within 10 rounds.

Lennox Lewis: Has a shot of stopping Sullivan early, otherwise he tires within the first 30 rounds and gets flattened.

The horrible technique, poor stamina, excessive muscle and lack of spunk would undermine most 20th century boxers. Boxing, like all sports, evolved, and there's no way that a 21rst century soccer player could survive in the 19th century game; equally, there's no way a 21rst century boxer could be competitive in the 19th century boxing scene. Horses for courses, as they say.

 

Which is a complete non-sensical statement. Comparing memories over 40 years old in terms of speed, or actually anything, is a joke and emotion-based reasoning.


Also, i have to question Sullivan's opposition. Information was much lesser so available back then and methods of transport were primitive, probably reduced to a limited network of steam-based trains or horse carriage.

Take note that in 1918, Dempsey was described as "an unknown fighter" according to a newsreport... this was after three or four years of knocking out lots of fighters. Now, go back 30 years in time. Was there an international ranking system? How many fights did most of Sullivan's opponents have? Sorry, but my impression is that outside of a few, most of Sullivan's opponents were local tough men, the strongest guy of this tavern, etc. It was a completely different society that was much more localized.

I have read that some of the fights did draw large crowds, but of course there was **** all else to do back then.

 

Nah, the US was a much more exciting place then, before Prohibition.

 

Well, i suppose public hangings was something to mark on your calender.

 

I would say it's likely he wins against all the above.

Speculation either way borders on the ridiculous.

 

any particular reason why jersey joe walcott was left off this list?