Sullivan fight of the week Sullivan Burke

Bit,

Just tell me why Sullivan had but two KO's from 1885-1892 in a total of nine fights. I'll give you the Cardiff fight where he injured his left arm ( which happened in 1887 Sullivan only fought two more times after this )

It seems to me as the competition level went up. ( Burke, Cardiff, McCaffrey ) ...Sullivan's KO's became rare. Strange for a puncher under 30 years old!

Now those are facts, feel free to reply to them if the narrative is false. My guess is you can't or won't which means I'm correct

Or he could not land the finishing blow. Most of the fights back then had issues with the police on some level.
5 or 6 rounds to me is enough rounds when one guy has a significant age, weight, and power advantage.

I see an increase in competition for Sullivan from 1885-1892 and too few Ko's

Defensive skills such as Corbett displayed were seldom if ever reported back in the mid 1880's

 

How do you know his competition improved? What's the based on? We generally know more about them, there's better reporting etc., that doesn't mean they were better though.

You have his opponents going down constantly in short fights, notes of rounds or fights being stopped when he was on top to avoid police interference, him not even trying to stop opponents to avoid police interference.

 

Very good. My take is Sullivan was a rare heavyweight puncher in the 1870's and 1880's in a land of smaller men who did use much defense. I'm not even sure if Sullivan ever fought a good gloved puncher. Keyword, gloved.
Sullivan stood out in his time, and his larger than life personality amplified his fame.

Some might hate this comparison, but he could have been the Tommy Morrison of his times, looking very good vs. weak opposition. Morrison, much like Sullivan had many issues outside the ring, drinking heavily and going through women as quickly as a regular guy would finish a pack of gum. Morrison also had a lot of problems with his hands and knees. So the quick KO's over unknowns, power, and issues outside the ring match. The lack of defense probably also matched.

 

As you prove w each post.

 

Outside of Middle weight Charlie Mitchell, Cardiff, McCaffrey and Burke in the mid 1880's were his best he meet.

We might agree on that? Do you think say any big puncher lets much smaller guys go the distance?

Big punchers are supposed to blow out smaller, not threating types. It did not happen here in many cases and you can't say going down often is the main reason why. If you hit hard enough, they take the count, or give up.

 

Personally I'd say more knockdowns than rounds is a blow out.

 

Its unfair to bracket H.E. with Mendoza,he is ten times the poster he is!

 

Another way around Janitor. You're not listening to reason.

I can only speak for myself.

We likely agree that Sullivan's competition wasn't as good as his successors. The problem becomes compounded by the fact he did not face the best-gloved fighters of the 1880's to early 1890's.

In fact, he avoided them ( Jackson and Slavin ). So in all reality, who did he beat? If Mitchell is his best win, that is not saying much.

Judging by the most recognizable named fighters he fought, and taking many smaller guys the distance, all I see is excuses as to why.

If you watch modern heavyweight boxing, most new pro's that are puncher's have little trouble making their early opponents fall. I think Sullivan did the same in his time. But when the " Name " competition went up, he struggled a bit too much.

Sullivan himself if you want the best source said the game changed becoming more scientific by the early 1900's, flat out saying he would have no chance vs. Jeffries. So whatever skills you think he had were way behind what was seen in the 1890's to 1900's.

 

Sometimes by accident you agree with me. In this case you think Sullivan wasn't all that.

I think HE is 100X the poster you are, and if I'm not mistaken he has taken shots at you before. Many have, its hard to keep count!

 

Jack Johnson started well ,but after the third round it was observed he used his left arm sparingly.What does that suggest to you? The report you posted btw was an AP report from a news agency filed by a scribe who wasn't present at the fight. I have the reports from ringside newsmen , they differ from your agenda one!
Johnson next defended against Frank Moran ,who had just ko'd Al Palzer ,during that time Jim Johnson lost to Porky Flynn. Johnson sparred with two more boxers that afternoon.You don't know WTF you are talking about ,which of course is normal.

 

Don't tell me what I think ,you have enough trouble doing that for yourself!
I think Sullivan was the standout fighter for several years and I'm in broad agreement with Janitor on this.
H.E.and I differ on,lots of things but I respect him and I hope he does me.You, I wouldn't wipe my shoes on.

You've managed to squeeze in your daily dose of hatred,and venom of Jack Johnson.

Now let's get back to John Lawrence Sullivan .

 

This comment is naturally based on all the footage of the era you have seen?

 

Well Mitchell smashed Slavin around the ring, dropping him multiple times, and then out of the ring.

So clearly Mitchell was miles ahead of Slavin. #NoExcuses