Sullivan fight of the week Sullivan Burke

Thet seem to have been but were probably better promoted, certainly Mitchell with Madden behind him. Burke did better with Corbett than Mitchell did, in fact many felt he had the edge on Corbett. Both did pretty well the same v Cleary while you could argue for either on their Sullivan fights. Their own fights were unbelievably even, the 1881 bare-knuckle fight was declared a draw, Mitchell had most of the falls but Burke looked the stronger at the end. In their American bouts, all were well contested but any edge that showed was with Charlie. However Burke resumee in the rest of his career is more impressive than Mitchell's, eg the draw with Slavin versus Mitchell's loss to McCaffrey.
Burke was generally thought to have won the first Greenfield contest. Burke clearly was better in their two March 1885 battles in America and had a vastly superior body of work otherwise.

 

Would you agree the above three were the best Sullivan fought?

Mitchell Drew with Cardiff and Burke. Biggest win likely Jim Mace

Cardiff's best result is the draw with Sullivan, but better fighters such as Killen and Jackson, who I'd argue were better than ANYONE Sullivan fought outside or Corbett beat Cardiff.

Burke's best win? Maybe Mike Cleary.

 

Burns and O'Brien both fought a middleweight fought a middleweight.

The rest of what you said is true, but no one pays any attention to that stuff with Sullivan which was my point.

O'Brien listed at 162.5, if he wanted to, he could have easily made the middle weight limit.

Burns listed at 168.

I've read Ketchel was actually under 160 for Johnson too.

So yes Johnson did fight middle weights, and I'd include Langford in the mix too.

 

Yes, he was one of the stand out fighters of the era. Jackson, Slavin, and Killen also have that claim. So you can say there were a BIG four. Only one time did any of them meet, and it was Jackson > Slavin. Sullivan avoided Slavin.

I still think Goddard would rate as Sullivan's best win.

We know Sullivan was the better vs. the smaller men, but in many cases, he failed to put them away, which leads me to believe If he was fighting a guy his size, with some power, he might lose 1 or 2.

 

Janitor,

Isn't five rounds are enough if you hit hard enough vs. a smaller middle with very little power.

I'd pick three of Sullivan's successors up to 1918, such as Fitzsimmons, Jeffries, and Dempsey to finish Burke in a 5 round match and a few others who never won the lineal title to do the same.

What I can't get past is how can a big puncher under 30, with a significant weight advantage not put away smaller middleweights?

But he was past his prime you might say, well before 30...

Sullivan's prime must have been the duration of a 90's year old's erection.

The concept of Queensberry defense was not around in those days, so I'm not buying they were all defensive wizards, and I tend to doubt they smaller guys he could not finish had heavyweight level chins. Shannon Briggs as an older guy has stamina issues but put him in there vs. a guy who would not sniff top 50 today at heavyweight, and he blows them out because he's a puncher.

Okay, Sullivan had drinking issues, drinking back then probably a problem for his opponents too. For example, Peter Jackson had drinking issues.

I do enjoy these reads, and I'm almost hoping to read something that backs up the Paul Bunyonesque legend of John L. Sullivan. I'm just not seeing any of that so far.

 

Read up on Burke and Mitchell, they were accomplished boxers and defensivey adept. Dempsey had problems with Meehan, Jeffries didn't put Choynski out, he took 11 to get Fitz out, Fitz himself took 9 or more to get the better of Dempsey, Upham and McCarty. Boxrec never tells the full story, only Slavin pur Burke out in a claimed 500 plus fights, and Pritchard when Jack was weight weakened.

 

Probably because you didn't have internet forums full of people talking nonsense.

They didn't go from bareknuckle to modern rules overnight.

It was common for LPR fights to be fought with gloves.

There were hard gloves, skin tight gloves, even a lot of the bigger ones were like 4oz, the rules against throws weren't enforced that much.

The only difference is it makes diving less effective, but a lot of Sullivan's opponents did it anyway.

Clearly they had other defensive methods, and these still work especially in early Queensberry

How many modern refs wouldn't stop a fight with more than 3 knock downs in a round?

 

If you hit hard enough, it's a ten count, or the will of the fighter to continue ceases to exist. Neither of that happened in the fights I'm talking about.

 

Ketchel's manager said he weighed 177lbs on the morning of the fight.Since he did not officially weigh in we don't know.Same for O Brien, and Burns, you of course will accept the lowest weight you can find for them,but that is no surprise! Johnson ever get his nose broke and his face cut to pieces by a middleweight?lol

 

Oh, Ketchel's manager said it so it must be true. Ketchel wore heeled boots to make himself look taller for the photos.

Looking at the film (something you hardly do) Ketchel seems under 160 pounds to me. 177? Get out of here.

I have seen other posters mention under 160. Try Klompton

We know it's your agenda to make Johnson opponents as big and bad as possible, and lamely attempt to mitigate his losses with numerous excuses.

But I do think Sullivan and Johnson have things in common, they avoided the best as challengers as champion and often had just okay results with smaller men. Sullivan at least didn't lose to middleweight types, Johnson did.

 

I've stated clearly that I don't know what either Burns,O Brien,or Ketchel weighed for the Johnson fights and neither do you. I really couldn't care, I was just correcting another posters assumptions. I first watched the Johnson v Ketchel fight in the 1960's when I bought it from the US.I was watching and analysing fight films before you were born.
You mentioned Klompton? Klompton is of the opinion the KD of Johnson was faked and that the punch did not land and I tend to agree with him.
Now don't **** up yet another thread with your phobic hatred of Jack Johnson,who is NOT the subject of this one, for once in your life show some ****ing manners!

 

Slavin did not leave the Southern Hemisphere until Aug 1889.Sullivan had his last fight against Kilrain that year and didnt fight for another 3 years. Slavin was in the Uk when Sullivan toured Australia1891 ,by that date Sullivan was well past his prime.

 

Why didn't he make an effort to fight any of them? Everything I've read says he went there with no intention of fighting any of them. In trying to get him in shape for Kilrain, Muldoon flat out challenged him to get into shape by openly questioning him time and again if he ever was a great fighter as he doubted it and took the opportunity to test his own fitness strategies .. the myth is one thing but if the best men Sullivan beat as Janitor keeps proving were blown up, under sized, old aged, M of Q novices while spending almost all of 1884 to 1891 a flat out , over weight, poorly conditioned , fall down, left for dead drunk other than short window for a bareknuckle fight against Jake, no amount of Janitor's regurgitated spin applauded by a chorus of trolls changes the facts ..

How does Sullivan's "strong" competition ( Cardiff, McCaffrey, Burke ) measure up against other M of Q champs ? My take is that Butterbean fought better men. No joke.