Sulllivan vs Corbett was not the first Gloved match for the world's heavyweight champ

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Mike South, Jul 26, 2011.


  1. Mike South

    Mike South Member Full Member

    310
    17
    Oct 25, 2005
    Did a little research (yes, I'm a big boxing nerd). Turns out it was Mitchell vs Mace. Yes, I know, no-one could beat a prime Sullivan etc, but his was a paper title because he never fought for the lineal title AND the lineal title was not vacant during his career. Here's how the lineage goes:

    24 May 1861 Mace beats Sam Hurst for Hvywt Championship of England. Defeats Joe Goss for same title 06 Aug 1866.

    10 May 1870 he beats Tom Allen to become Heavyweight Champ of both England and the US and the defacto world champion.

    Mace defends his World Championship twice against Joe Coburn. He scores at least 6 more recorded wins 1872 through 1877.

    In 1877 Mace moves to Australia and "drops off the radar" (he trains fighters like Peter Jackson and Bob Fitzsimmons) BUT HE NEVER RETIRES (KOs George Belcher 14 Sep 1882, for example) AND HE REMAINS UNDEFEATED until 07 Feb 1890 when he fights Charlie Mitchell in a gloved match. Mitchell beats Mace in 4.

    Sullivan, meanwhile, only engaged in 3 contests that could be considered World Championship contests, 2 of which were draws against Charlie Mitchell (who only weighed 165 lbs or so, by the way) and third was against Jake Kilrain, who was the paper champion of The Police Gazette. Other than his paper win over Kilrain, Sullivan had no basis (other than for promotional purposes) for claiming the World Title when he fought Corbett.

    The first world champion Corbett defeated was not John L, it was Charlie Mitchell, 25 Jan 1894, who he KO'd in 3, thereby restoring the traditional lineage.

    Would Sullivan have KO'd Mace if they had met between 1870 and 1890? Depends on when: Sullivan was 12 in 1870, and he was a washed up 32 by 1890. Some might argue that Mace fled to Australia to escape Sullivan and thus forfeited the title, but Sullivan wasn't fighting professionally in 1877.

    The bottom line is, the lineage never passed to Sullivan. It passed from Mace to Mitchell to Corbett.

    Thanks for taking the time to read this.
     
  2. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,523
    27,102
    Feb 15, 2006
    I have to disagree.

    Mace was seen to have retired, and Allen/Goss was seen as a fight for the vacant title.

    The editor of the Police Gazette (Fox), hated Sullivan, and was always looking for ways to undermine his title claim. He would promote any alternative claimant, however peripheral!
     
  3. amhlilhaus

    amhlilhaus Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,840
    12
    Mar 24, 2005
    during the period of sullivans' rise, he challenged everyone, and no one in the press held any illusions that jem mace was still world champion. it's a nice theory, but failing to fight a top contender for 18 years and ignoring the man calling out everyone during the early 1880's disqualifies your championship claims.

    only jack broughton held a inactive claim for close to a decade, and only because of poor record keeping he may have fought during that period. mace was no longer champion by 1880.
     
  4. Mike South

    Mike South Member Full Member

    310
    17
    Oct 25, 2005
    Thank you for your thoughtful responses. I'd like to learn more about this era. Janitor, could you please direct me to sources that support the assertion that Mace was seen to be retired and that Allen/Goss was seen as the legit title fight? thx.
     
  5. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,344
    Jun 29, 2007
    Richard Fox of the Police Gazette wanted Slavin vs. Sullivan. Sullivan did not, and threw out his belt, correct?
     
  6. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,372
    473
    Oct 6, 2004
    Jem Mace actually challenged Sullivan. He thought it would be an absolutely huge money spinner. The problem is that Jem was too old, by the time Sullivan came around, and he wanted to fix the outcome, which sullivan wanted no part of. From memory, this was around about the Herbert Slade period.

    Also, dont forget that in 1883, Mace lost to Lord Charles Beresford by stoppage, so his claim as world champion, if he had any would have disintegrated. Despite his age and probably lack of condition, this fight has always troubled me about Mace, Beresford was untrained and if the fight and result was a real one, as the papers reportedl, then either Mace was (i) Not as good as we are lead to believe, (ii) Completely shot and not even close to a World class fighter by this time or (iii) took a dive for the money. I must admit, i think that III is probably the most likely.
     
  7. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,372
    473
    Oct 6, 2004
    When Slavin wanted to fight Sullivan, Sullivan had retired and was on a theatrical tour. When Sullivan eventually came out of retirement, Sullivan narrowed his potential challengers down to three. Corbett, Slavin and (from memory only) Jackson. Corbett got in first, and it probably didnt hurt that Sullivan probably knew he was going to lose soon and preferred to lose to an American, although obviously luck played its part as did having his finances and backing in order. This is all in the Slavin biography series of articles i posted a few months back.
     
  8. Mike South

    Mike South Member Full Member

    310
    17
    Oct 25, 2005
    Thank you this excellent post. It is one of several in this thread. I was needlessly worried that my attempt to challenge conventional wisdom with historical data would in turn yield nothing in response but attempts to challenge historical data using conventional wisdom.

    My understanding of the Beresford fight is that is was a private fight, and thus the championship would not have been on the line. I had also assumed that such a private fight was bought and paid for by the Lord's money, with the expectation he would lose.
     
  9. Mike South

    Mike South Member Full Member

    310
    17
    Oct 25, 2005
    In Grombach's "Saga of the Fist" (Barnes 1949), Sullivan allegedly acknowledged Jackson's challenge but publicly drew the colour line. the remaining challengers are detailed as Corbett, Slavin and Mitchell.

    But doesn't Sullivan's retiremant further weaken his claim to lineal legitimacy? The argument has been proposed here that an inactive but unretired fighter (assuming fighting dozens of exhibitions a year makes one inactive) like Mace loses his claim to the lineage by virtue of his inactivity, then what about a fighter who publicly retires from the sport altogether?
     
  10. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    80,694
    21,308
    Sep 15, 2009
    We can't rewrite history. John l is regarded as the first heavyweight champion of the world and he was regarded as such during his career. Nothing will ever change this.

    None the less it is interesting to hear about boxers from that time.
     
  11. Senya13

    Senya13 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,966
    2,410
    Jul 11, 2005
    There wasn't such thing as generally recognized champion back then. Same for many other fights of 18th century which are considered bareknuckle championship bouts now.
     
  12. apollack

    apollack Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,225
    1,634
    Sep 13, 2006
    In a February 1890 bout promoted as being for the heavyweight championship of England, Mitchell defeated the ancient and inactive but famous bareknuckle ex-champion Jem Mace in a 4 two-minute round gloved bout, dropping him a couple of times early until it was stopped by the police in the 4th round. The fight was meaningless, as Mace was over 60 years old.

    Sullivan was the gloved champion. It is all explained in John L. Sullivan: The Career of the First Gloved Heavyweight Champion.
     
  13. Mike South

    Mike South Member Full Member

    310
    17
    Oct 25, 2005
    Yes, I quite enjoyed your book. At what age does a fighter's bouts lose their meaning? Do Bernard Hopkins, George Foreman and Bob Fitzsimmons get to keep their titles?
     
  14. apollack

    apollack Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,225
    1,634
    Sep 13, 2006
    Essentially, Mace stopped fighting in the early 1870s. He had one fight in 1876 and one in 1877. Thereafter, he only engaged in friendly exhibitions, and was a boxing professor. He was retired. Bareknuckle fighting was basically dead when Sullivan came around. In the interim, Mace had been acting as a trainer/manger for Herbert Slade and eventually backed Slade's early 80s challenge to Sullivan. So fast forward to 1890 for the Mitchell bout and you have a guy who hadn't had a formal fight for over ten years, or at least 8 years if you count the 1882 Belcher bout. You don't retire from boxing for that length of time and still maintain your championship. If that is so, then Gene Tunney was heavyweight champion until he died, and so was Rocky Marciano. The whole world knew Sullivan was champion and to argue that Mace was still champ is a bit of a stretch. Actually, the Mitchell-Mace bout wasn't even advertised as the world championship, but the English championship, and Mitchell was the English champ, not Mace.
     
  15. Surf-Bat

    Surf-Bat Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,736
    96
    Jul 20, 2010
    And Sullivan-McCaffrey was the first heavyweight championship fight under Queensberry rules, yes? Correct me if I'm mistaken on that. But your book seemed to indicate that it was.