No footage of John L fighting other than him horsing around as an old man. Patterson has solid technique and extremely quick hands. My guess is he ko's Sullivan with a big left hook. A little unfair to John L as he was a pioneer and boxing technique hadn't developed yet. Boxing techniques improved significantly by the 1920's and had been perfected by the 40's. We are talking 5-6 decades of technique evolution here. Sullivan with his hands down straight forward style would likely get stopped. Now if this was bareknuckle, i could see Sullivan having a chance.
Patterson. Sullivan should not be selected over any subsequent champ and he has the most manufactured resume of all time even in the context of his era. People blame Fury for fighting a 0-0 pro boxer well Sullivan did it 27 times in a 41 fight gloved career. As champ he did it 12 times in a row and 13 out of 15.
In an era where boxing was illegal and boxers essentially had their fights privately, or in short length exhibition bouts, we can’t expect them to have the same amount of official fights as other eras did, but it never meant that those opponents had no boxing experience. These guys sparred or had exhibitions (or fights disguised as exhibitions) constantly. Sullivan’s resume is quite stacked as far as early-to-mid 1880s fighters go. The likes of Goss, Donovan, Stewart, Ryan, McCaffrey, Mitchell, Burke, Greenfield and Kilrain were seen as La crème du crop when Sullivan beat them, so it’s not like he was just can crushing for his entire career. That isn’t including other opponents who were regarded as having been experienced.
I think it would more be Peter Jackson, Killen, Cardiff, Godfrey and McAuliffe with Kilrain, Mitchell and McCaffrey also there but not in the front. Sullivan fought Kilrain and Jem Smith in bare knuckle not gloved and the same presumably applys to Goss and Donovan because they don't show up on Sullivans boxerrec. Paddy Ryan never won a professional gloved boxing match. And maybe the comparing him to Fury is unfair(for that reason anyway theres quite a few other similarities) and 0-0 opponents were more normal than they are today for sure but Sullivans resume wasn't stacked for his era and paled next to most of his contemparies he didn't beat and who aren't considered the champ of the period. He has 1 stoppage over a notable gloved boxer in Charlie Mitchell and doesn't have wins over any of the true top guys of his era.
Boxrec is useless when reviewing the records of fighters from Sullivan’s era. Paddy Ryan beat Goss, and was a well regarded scientific boxer with the gloves as well. Sullivan did beat Goss as well as Donovan in gloved matches. He beat pretty much all the top guys of his era before he went inactive around 1886-87, and even then he beat Kilrain who was a top 4 fighter and he was shot. Jackson, Killen, McAullife weren’t relevant in the division until Sullivan was washed. Sullivan offered to fight Godfrey in 1888 when they met in person but Godfrey was the one that refused. Sullivan’s resume is as about as stacked as early 1880s resumes get. I also don’t see the reason for Killen or McAuliffe being above Kilrain or Mitchell either. It would’ve been a good fight for Sullivan to take since it would’ve tested his chin, but again the guy was essentially a full blown alcoholic after 1884. He rarely turned up in shape after that, but even then when you read the reports of Sulivan’s fights with McCaffrey and Burke, you can argue that those fights could’ve been stopped at quite a few points and that they were on survival mode. He didn’t dominate a spectacular era, even by the standards of just a few years later. But he did dominate his era’s finest.
Oh "early 1880s" his resume isn't as bad if we view him as the destroyer of the old bare knuckle alumni as the sport was transitoning. But Sullivan wasn't part of that generation and the youngest one would be Paddy Ryan whose 5 years older. Besides Mitchell pretty much all Sullivans big wins were between late 1884 and late 1886. Sullivan was 29 years old in 1887 and 27 when he beat McCaffrey. He is considered lineal champ as late as 1892 a title he should have lost when he broke his arm against Cardiff who proceeded to lose to Killen, Peter Jackson and Godfrey. Its fair to compare Sullivan to those guys and his resume is not "stacked" compared to them. I didn't bring up Slavin, Goddard or Denver Ed Smith because they come around a little later but they all have better resumes too. Speaking of Goddard he is older than Sullivan and was competing for belts for like another decade. You're right Kilrain would be regarded above Peter Jackson, Killen and McAuliffe in the early to mid 1880s Sullivan didn't fight him then though he fought him in 1889(in bare knuckle which doesn't count) 5 years after Sullivans supposedly washed. At this time all the guys I've mentioned should be rated higher than Kilrain. Not saying that Kilrain was washed just that he wasn't as highly rated as hed been a few years earlier. You are right about Sullivan being capable of stopping all those guys and coming close according to some sources. Short distances were the main reason Sullivan didn't get those stoppages, the police ended the Herald fight after 2 rounds too. But those circumstances existed Sullivans whole career. Sullivan got a stoppage against all the 0-0s and 0-1s etc. Every single one including Paddy Ryan. And besides Mitchell he didn't get a stoppage against any single fighter with a real pro boxing record. Also in the bare knuckle fight Kilrain lasted 70 something rounds. If you do the conversion its way less than 75 but still way longer than your typical fight. Then theres the size of all of Sullivans best opponents. Mitchell, McCaffrey and Greenfield were 5 ft 9. Burke was under 5 ft 7. Heralds size is unknown. All the guys I've mentioned are substantially bigger and McAuliffe was 6 ft 3(who also beat Paddy Ryan). None of Sullivans good opponents were above the LHW limit. Among the old bare knucklers Goss and Donovan were 5 ft 8. "It would’ve been a good fight for Sullivan to take since it would’ve tested his chin, but again the guy was essentially a full blown alcoholic after 1884. He rarely turned up in shape after that". One of the many similarities with Tyson Fury. One key difference with Tyson Fury is Tyson Fury is over 6 inches taller than Floyd Patterson. Sullivan is the same size. Theres not very many fighters Pattersons size who could beat him much less one from the 1880s. Anyway the point is Sullivan should not be picked after any subsequent champ much less a Floyd Patterson. And he shouldn't.
His resume is stacked when we’re regarding who he beat in his era (1878-1887), which is not the same era as Jackson, or Killen either really since his breakthrough appeared to be in 1888. It doesn’t matter how old Sullivan was by the time these men peaked because his body was pretty much destroyed by the time he was 28. His left arm never fully recovered after Cardiff, and he was almost on his death bed in 1888. People thought it was a miracle he even got into fighting shape for Kilrain, let alone beat him. Kilrain was likely at his peak by the time he fought Sullivan, I don’t see much evidence to suggest the contrary or that he was past his peak by the time he fought Sullivan. On the other hand, it was clear Sullivan was shot according to observers who saw him fight in the past. I liken Sullivan to Jeffries in many ways: his best opponents were small men, but that doesn’t mean every big man he beat was a stooge. Paddy Ryan was seen by many as being more scientific than Sullivan before their first fight, and in their second fight it seems like he held his own against Sullivan until the police stepped in. Ryan would do consistent exhibitions between his win over Goss and his loss to Sullivan where his ‘science’ impressed many. Jack Stewart was 6’1 200 lbs and was the champion of Canada, with a win over undefeated black contender C.A.C Smith. Frank Herald was roughly 190, as was Kilrain. Goss may have peaked as a bare knuckle boxer but he was a well regarded technician who was experienced with gloves. Same with Donovan, except more so. Sullivan got a stoppage against all the 0-0s and 0-1s etc. Every single one including Paddy Ryan. And besides Mitchell he didn't get a stoppage against any single fighter with a real pro boxing record. Again, Boxrec is an unreliable source when it comes to the Sullivan era, especially considering how much documented experience these men had that Boxrec doesn’t take into account. Sullivan was stopping anyone he fought of note, until his own habits got the better of him. Anyway the point is Sullivan should not be picked after any subsequent champ much less a Floyd Patterson. And he shouldn't. I’d say that a case for picking Sullivan here, and in any H2H matchup, largely has to do with how highly regarded he was, almost ridiculously so. At his absolute peak, every boxing observer on the planet, some who have seen fighters as far back as the 1840s and some form much better eras than Sullivan’s time, were all in agreement that THIS guy was the best, and that the only thing that could beat him was himself. Even when Sullivan stepped foot on enemy territory in Australia, the public still couldn’t let their bias or love for Jackson uphold the fact that that Sullivan was incredibly talented. Even Choynski thought Sullivan was the best fighter in the world when he met him, and thought he would beat Jackson had they fought. Just think about how rare it is to unite the old generations with the new ones, as well as your enemies, in agreement that you are the best fighter in the world. Many in the press also despised him but begrudgingly had to admit he was the best. I think your analogy for comparing Fury to Sullivan is accurate, in more ways than their drinking habits. Both were essentially wasted talent, who could’ve had much better careers than they ended up having. Other good examples are Bowe and Vitali who, despite not having great resumes, were arguably the most talented heavyweights in their respective eras.
Yeah, at the least, we need to know if it’s LPR or MOQ (and how many rounds). Hard to gage Sullivan for obvious reasons but it’s still fun to chew over such matches. With less insight on Sullivan he’ll obviously suffer more for the lack of visual evidence on him as compared to those who came after his time. Under MOQ, I have to go for Patto - and by later round KO.
I feel like it would be unfair for Patterson to make this an LPR fight, he’d be far out of his league there against someone with as much experience and credence as Sullivan. 15 rounds, Queensbury rules seems like the most fair.
Patterson would give a boxing lesson with a side of convulsions to the old timer. And I respect Sullivan, but I can't insult the greats who came after, either.
