Lil Arthur vs. the Boston Strong Boy. Johnson vs Sullivan

Name one world class fighter that Sullivan fought and defeated in a M of Q bout. Not a local tough man, not an exhibition but a highly rated, M of Q fighter. The answer is no one. He very likely may have not been the best prize fighter of his time as the Q of A was far more widely advanced and practiced in Australia.

He was what he was … the rest is fantasy.

 

So how did some of Jimmy Wildes opponents come to hold the British Title going into their profesional debut?

Were they born with it?

The reality is that the majority of fights of this period were not recorded, and all of these men would have had more fights than their surviving records suggest.

 

The enduring image of Sullivan seems to be the bloated veteran who gatecrashed bars and challenged any n' everyone to a bare-knuckle brawl.

The trim John L. of 1882-83 was brilliant, no doubt about it. Aside from his decapitating right he was said to be a quick fighter which is an aspect lost to those who know him solely through his battles with Jake Kilrain and Jim Corbett.

His physical strength was (by all accounts) tremendous for a guy around the 180-190lbs mark; that would be crucial in a fight with Jack Johnson. Perhaps Sullivan could march the Galveston Giant off-balance, wait for the right moment and get through with his honey punch. For Johnson, a measured jab and clever uppercuts inside would pave the route to victory, but it's difficult to say who would cancel each other out here.

Of one thing I am sure, it would be highly competitive.

*Though the London Prize Rules and Marquess of Queensberry rules were quite different their evolution was a very gradual affair, and as such they greatly influenced each other. It was not the revolution history sometimes dresses it up as. Even in the early 1800's there were men who stuck to sparring with the gloves. The lingering idea that the 19th century pugilists would have suffered a technical meltdown against any of the pioneers of the 20th century is not at all accurate.

 

Would Sullivan beat the Willard of Havana?
Willard had a great chin, and very good power in his right hand.
It's taking a lot on trust to confidently predict that Sullivan could take out a prime Jess.

I would pick Willard to beat everyone that Sullivan did.

Corbett was a groundbreaker ,Johnson called him the Father Of Modern Boxing .Corbett called Johnson the Emperor Of Fistiana. Johnson was bigger ,stronger, and more durable than Corbett, he also hit harder.
Johnson said he was as fast with his hand speed as Corbett but that Corbett was faster afoot. Corbett would not be able to tie up a prime Suillivan, nor match him for strength in the clinches. He would box on the retreat, but would be in danger whenever Sullivan got into range.

 

Sullivan was held to draws by middleweights and also dropped by them. Dempsey took out an old fat Willard, that is NOT the version that Johnson fought in Havana.
Including Corbett's exhibitions as actual fights is a favourite ploy of yours. I notice you present Jeffries as a novice yet Corbett has all these."fights" .

Corbett himself told Tommy Loughran that he had 39 fights in his entire career.
* That is 17 more than Box rec can ratify.
Jeffries has as many,[ if not more,] exhibitions as Corbett ,many of them with him. Going into the Sharkey defence if we go by your criteria Jeffries had over 120" fights".And that is being conservative.
Jeffries had about a dozen uncredited fights in his California AC.
A shed load when on tour, twice nightly usually.its absurd to count these, or Corbett's as real bouts.

Do you now see how absolutely ridiculous your premise is?
Ps Choynski fought a relatively inexperienced Johnson. Corbett was much more experienced than Choynski ,[it is Choynski ,not Choysnki ,] he was the boxing instuctor at the AC

 

The ultimate irony here, is that Sullivan probably had more effect on the evolution of boxing and boxing technique than Corbett did.

Sullivan was the first person to really capitalise on the fact that the ten second count of a Queensbury fight allowed you to take out an opponent quickly, and avoid a long drawn out fight.

Sullivan beat the bare-knuckle champions under their own rules, then forced everybody who wanted their titles to challenge him under Queensbury rules.

Having a dominant and exciting Queensbury fighter, who unified the title claims under different rule sets and promoted gloved boxing, might have had far reaching implications.

Sullivan was the true father of modern boxing.

 

I think that is all fair comment, though possibly the Eddie Lawson fight Johnson might be a better guage if we are comparing. Still, Jess Willard v Jim Corbett might be an interesting comparison. Is it still common ground (like it was when Willard was around) that Corbett would be too good, or does size matter more nowadays?