Sullivan fight of the week Sullivan McCormick

Why should Sullivan base his opponents on someone over a century later's limit knowledge.

At this point it should be becoming clear that the knowledge is out there.

 

How would a five foot seven middleweight,[Ive picked the compromise height, Box rec has him at 5'7.5",Cyberzone at5'6.5" ]who was ko'd 15 times have added to Sullivan's resume? Which heavies of any ability did he ever beat?

 

Sullivan fought loads of men superior to LaBlanche; Greenfield, Herald, Dalton, Donaldson would be about his level.

 

Well, he was 35-4-11 until 1890, only be stopped just once in 50 fights. That's a decent record. LaBlanche beat Jack Dempsey and drew with Denver Ed Smith. Those are names I recognize.

He was KO'd later in his career often, but as I said in the mid to late 1880's, he would have been a good name on Sullivan's resume.

I find my self asking the same question about Sullivan himself, which heavies of ability did he beat with gloves? Its not a long list.

 

Smith was hammering LaBlanche when the police interfered, having had him down and was about to finish him off. The Dempsey win was by a foul blow.

 

He beat Dempsey by using the pivot back hand blow that was then outlawed and he would never get back in the ring with him.Dempsey was 151lbs for that fight, Dempsey was beating him up until then.
Lablanche's first 22 opponents were nobodies,then he lost to Dempsey,of his next 56 opponents, 30 of them were nobodies.
Who did he legitimately beat who was of any stature?

I asked you what heavyweights of any ability did he beat?
The answer is of course NONE . He would have added nothing to Sullivan's record.

 

McCvey

[url]http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/lablanche-george.htm[/url]

You can dismiss them all if you wish. He wasn't old at the time like some of Sullivan's opponents were. Interesting note:


1886-1887
-LaBlanche traveled with the [url]John L. Sullivan[/url] Combination and had
numerous exhibition bouts with [url]Jimmy Carroll[/url], [url]Robert "Cocky" Turnbull[/url]
and others

 

Fine then, Sullivan ducked the great LaBlanche who "beat" the middleweight champion in a fight he couldn't win the title because he was over the limit, with an illegal punch in a fight he was losing, and who didn't fight heavyweights anyway. Just like how Kovalev fought OLD Hopkins and clearly ducked Lemieux

 

1889-08-29 San Francisco Chronicle (page 8)
In the general discussion about town regarding the fight the reporter heard much adverse criticism of the blow which sent the heretofore undefeated Nonpareil down and out. The Marquis of Queensberry rules, under which the contest took place, provides that the contestants shall wear gloves and there shall be nothing except fair stand-up fighting. It is claimed that the blow which La Blanche struck Dempsey, while technically speaking not a foul, does not line entirely with the spirit of the rule. After landing lightly with his left he swung the right which Dempsey dodged by inclining his head to the right shoulder. While in this position the Marine swung his hand back, catching his antagonist full in the face with the elbow and bones of the forearm, a blow crushing enough in its force to fell an ox in much the same manner as it did the Nonpareil, even when victory seemed almost within his grasp. Among the members of the California Club the matter has caused much discussion, and many of them favor the idea of a revised code of rules to govern future contests given by the club, in which all heeling and blows of this character shall be designated as fouls.


1889-09-02 San Francisco Chronicle (page 5)
There is still much discussion over the Dempsey-La Blanche fight and talk of the necessity of a revision of the rules. The rules seem to have worked very well in all previous contests and certainly nothing in the rules helped La Blanche to win or Dempsey to lose. No matter how carefully rules are drawn, there much always be much left to the discretion of the referee, and with a good man like Hiram Cook the desired result is sure to be reached, namely, the best man will win. The best man will always win if the fight be long enough so that the referee who is not over quick to allow claims of foul, is after all the most desirable. It must be remembered that glove-boxing to a finish is rough play--rough as football, almost--and men break each other's arms, legs and noses in football without committing fouls that affect the result of the game.

Dempsey is himself a very cunning fighter and never misses a chance to strain the rules to his advantage. He would never have been a champion had he done differently. He is always on the alert to clinch his opponent and avoid punishment in a rally and to give a blow when breaking away. No doubt the Marine committed several fouls in the late fight, and the crowd, which was a Dempsey one, noted every offense. These fouls, however, did not affect the result in the least, and as the contest progressed the breaches of ring law became fewer, so that the referee had an easy time of it.

Mr. Cook discharged his duty well, and had he allowed any of the fouls committed the dissatisfaction over the fight would have been intense and probably disastrous to his club. As to the Marine knocking Dempsey out by a blow of the forearm instead of the fist it is a well known fact that for years glove fighters have been using the forearm as a weapon. The blow is an injurious one if successful, but the man who tries to use his forearm on his antagonist takes a great many chances. He is very likely to fracture the arm, and as the blow must be a swinging one, and therefore comparatively slow, he may be knocked down while trying to deliver it. Dempsey used his left wrist repeatedly on the Marine, but the taurine neck and firm jaw of the latter were proof against anything lighter than a baseball bat. Before the seventh round Dempsey's left forearm was all red from the swinging blows he dealt the Marine on the side of his head, so that the knock-out by the Marine with the right forearm was only a return of the compliment. Peter Jackson is one of the few pugilists who in glove fights never uses the forearm, but always relies on clean, square hits with the fist. This accounts for the excellent condition in which he keeps his hands. As to men fighting when clinched it is hard to see why it should not be permitted to the extent Referee Cook allows it. If pugilists are in the same class and very nearly the same weight, one man should have as much chance as the other at close fighting, and it is part of his business to be able to take care of himself in all positions. The opinion of many good judges of boxing is that when two men are clinched and fighting they should be allowed to fight, but if clinched and only wrestling the referee should order them to break. To order the men to step back a pace the moment they clinch, as has been suggested by some, is a bad rule, as it puts a premium on fighting at long range only, which is but half of the game. The case of Dempsey and the Marine is a good illustration. Dempsey is very clever at outfighting, and every time the Marine rushed him to close quarters he grappled La Blanche to keep him from fighting. With a man a little less formidable than La Blanche such tactics would be sure to win, and the referee, every time he ordered the men to break from a clinch without a blow, would be given Dempsey a point. The stronger but less clever man or the man with a shorter reach is entitled to an equal chance, and he can only get it by allowing him to do some fighting when clinched. If this is understood the man who prefers outfighting will be quick to break the hold and get again at long range, and the duties of the referee, instead of being complicated, will be simplified.

 

Okay, I should have said questionably legal. Doesn't change the other point.

 

His argument is patent nonsense.

 

You don't know what you're talking about. Luckily Senya13 set you straight.

The fighters Sullivan did not fight were better than the ones he beat from 1880-1990. I never claimed LaBlance was great, just that he could have added to Sullivan's resume in the mid 1880's. That's it.

But if you want to show the board what you know, go ahead and list Sullivan's best five golved wins in the 1880's.

 

I said illegal when questionably legal would have been more accurate, even from the one sided articles Senya posted it was clear this was something that was disputed. That means I don't know what I'm talking about, from the guy who assessed 1880's boxers using boxrec.

So what the hell else were you implying when you posted that nonsense about them being on an exhibition tour together?

I never claimed to be a Sullivan expert, and the information is fragementory as hell, how can you asses who is better by comments that people were highly regarded, versus them being a champion of an area, without knowing about thier actual fights and opponent? So, no, I can't rank his top opponents. I have listed notable ones before anyway, but because you didn't know anything about them, and didn't do any research, that proved something or other, and because you have heard of LaBlanche clearly he's better, the whole universe, past present and future revolves around you.