Ken Norton v John L. Sullivan (75 rounds)

Do we even know if the reason Choynski was so impressed by Sullivan was due to his own experiences tasting his power though? They were on the same exhibition tour and likely sparred the same fighters continuously, maybe Joe noticed that the way those fighters reacted to Sullivan’s power compared to his own was different or something.

Like Janitor said; very Jack The Ripper-esque evidence here. Not much to draw from.

I have also read a few reports describing Choynski as one of San Francisco’s quickest little men awhile back.

 

Choynski is not exactly saying that he thinks that Sullivan hit a bit harder.

He is basically saying that there is a gulf, and that is something that might well be obvious in sparring.

Obviously he is gong to know who is faster.

I have never trusted fighters testimony, regarding different opponents power.

However their testimony is evidence.

You don't want to be the guy changing the evidence to fit their opinion, as opposed to the guy changing their opinion to fit the evidence.

 

Sullivan Corbett was very one sided, albeit Sullivan dragged it out a long time in hindsight.

After the Killrain fight, Sullivan basically started drinking himself to death.

The details are not pretty.

He would later say, that the greatest victory of his life, was beating the black bottle.

 

Me spar Dubois? Do you think I’m crazy? For a million bucks, maybe. Lol.

More seriously, the testimonies themselves in favour of Choy, taken on face value, suggest that it is unlikely that Sullivan hit so much harder than Joe himself did - certainly not so much as to have Joe wishing that he had just 1/10 of John L’s power - obvious hyperbole of course.

So, to the actual comparison, Choy’s apparent power was sufficient to at least put in him in the same class as John L - and differentiating between the pair in that regard wouldn’t have been so cut and dried.

I’m also wondering how much Choy’s power was measured/perceived relative to his size (Corbett described Joe as scrawny but someone who hit very hard for his size) as opposed to its sheer measure in absolute terms.





As to superior speed, yes that is more easily perceived and measured - let’s just say I find Choy’s claim hard to believe in that regard given the context I’ve already laid out.

 

Could send copies my way Frank? I accidentally taped my wedding over my original VHS John L Boxed Set. The Mrs was livid - she loves her boxing also and John L is one of her faves - I think it’s the handle bar moustache that does it for her.

 

The facts are simple, and you make of them what you will.

Everybody who shared a ring with Choynski, practically had orgasms over his power.

If bigger men, like say Willard hit harder, then we won't hold that against him.

Choynski seems very confident, that an elderly and dilapidated Sullivan, was faster and more powerful than him.

So where does that leave us?

 

Corbett said: "I tell you that no one can whip Sullivan who is not as fast as I am. I am not so sure that he wouldn’t whip Peter Jackson, for Peter’s style would suit him a good deal better than mine. Peter would go and shy with him, and no man can do that with any hope of success."

 

Sullivan was an accident waiting to happen at this point, but in his prime he was a phenomenon.

Bill Kazmair was banned from strong man competitions, because they were ceasing to be competitive.

That is essentially where Sullivan was at in his prime.

 

It’s “evidence” of a sort - certainly not hard evidence and open to interpretation.

Given the heady testimonies afforded to Choy, it is unlikely that such a gulf in power (as claimed by Choy) existed between himself and John L.

That’s not changing hard evidence to suit one’s own subjective conclusion, rather, it’s applying critical thinking, questioning and ultimately, impartial judgment re an expressed opinion.

For example, I believe Johnson would beat Jeffries prime vs prime.

Now, shortly after Reno, Jeff was quoted as saying he could never.have beaten Johnson, he couldn’t have reached him, not in a thousand years.

That would suit my conclusion to buy into that quote - but I don’t.

Firstly, I can’t imagine Jeffries ever being inclined to say such a thing - particularly on the heels of a fight in which he was well beyond his old self.

Secondly, broader reading and understanding provides for other “evidence” to suggest that Jeffries likely never said it at all - rather, it was contrivance, invented by a newspaper reporter.

There’s also a good chance that Jeffries didn’t come up with half the racial slurs attributed to him by newspapers ramping up the race card all on this own.

So, one doesn’t want to be the guy who inequitably weights certain quotes more than others in order to suit or fit their opinion/conclusion.

Imagine, in 100 + years time, without the benefit of vision, taking all Fury’s claims/excuses after the Usyk fight as any measure of “evidence” -

- thereby accepting that it was one of Tyson’s “easiest” fights, he was “having fun” and “apparently” he also broke Usyk’s jaw and that Olek only got the nod due to the Ukrainian War. Lol.

 

Mucho credit to John L for kicking the booze and then going on to lecture about its evils. Particularly in the context of his own times.

Drinking was much more acceptable back then, probably even expected and there certainly weren’t the support systems we have today to assist people in kicking the habit.

 

Choynski usually weighed 175 and under. Sullivan 210 when in shape. Everyone in those days mentioned Joe's power. But was his punches really more powerful than Sullivan?

Personally I doubt it.

 

We can speculate that he might’ve drawn his conclusion via other references points but at least in this thread his impression of John L’s power was directly associated with Joe’s own sparring sessions against Sullivan.

 

Given when it when down, John L’s deteriorated state and Choy being 10 years younger, it leaves me heavily questioning Choy’s claims - at least in regards to speed.

I’ve never thought of elite power being viewed as orgasmic, at least not when you’re on the receiving end…though I might’ve misread the whys and wherefore behind Ingo’s twitching foot when Patto KO’d him cold.

Perhaps Ingo was actually experiencing “little death” as the French like to say.

 

The problem with this is that in Sullivan's case anecdotal evidence is often all that we have to go on.

This sometimes forces us to give it a weighting that we would not with later fighters.

 

Yes, discussion of the old timers has its own unique allure in that regard. Sans footage or adequate footage, our investigative abilities, impartiality and critical analyses are tapped more heavily - and it always makes for interesting discourse with new and important info sometimes picked up along the way.