I don't think that we can produce a definitive answer on this because Sullivan is now a pape mache figure glued together from contemporary newspaper articles. When asked to find a modern heavyweight to compare Sullivan to stylisticaly I have in the past brought up the name of Floyd Patterson though obviously Sullivan was much bigger, stronger nad more durable. This might imply some stylistic advantage for Liston. Sullivan almost certainly had much faster hands and feet for whatever that is worth. One thing that I do see these two sharing is that they were both intuitive fighters able to anticipate an oponents next move and to adapt their strategy mid round if it was not working. The modern rule set would not disadvantage Sullivan as much you might think because he fought some bouts with 8oz gloves and dealt with limits ranging from four rounds to indefinite. You probably have not picked the best modern fighter to showcase Sullivan's abilities here, for stylistic reasons. Pick a modern fighter who is better suited to him stylisticaly and he might really show you something.
I beleive you see Sullivan as an alltime puncher J ,and you may well be right,sad that he dissipated himself so quickly ,but he was a larger than life figure and greatly loved .Corbett's own Father bet on him to beat his son.
As you say I have come to the conclusion that Sullivan was an all time puncher. Reading the contemporary sources marshaled by Adam Pollack and others I have been forced round to that viewpoint. Now it is not difficult to see why Sullivan made such an impression on the contemporary psyche. In living memory before him there had been 160 lb fighters who were good all round punchers and technicians like Sayers and Mace and 200 lbs fighters who had prety mediocre technique like Heenan. People talk about a new generation of superheavyweights today but when Sullivan came allong it was like suddenly having a champion who had technique like Tom Sayers but was as big as John C Heenan. Fighters who were outlined by the contemporary press as being his strongest challengers were swept aside so completely that they are unknown today even to most posters on this board. That is why everybody wanted to shake the hand that shook the hand....
Floyd Patterson? I have always imagined him as being very similar to Tyson. I think that he had that same level of speed and that same pinpoint timing as the prime Tyson. Difference being that he probably was a little more effective fighting from outside than Tyson. Also, his chin seemed a little more proven and his heart and ability to grind out a win in adverse circumstances cannot be questioned, and he definitely seemed to carry his knockout power, even later in the fight. I also think, that if it is at all possible, he may also have been slightly more agressive than prime Tyson. On a negative note, Prime Tyson probably through a few more combinations than him and possibly had a slightly tighter defence and perhaps even a little better head movement. Tyson may have been a touch bigger, although i am not sure that this really would be much since neither was all that big, particularly when compared to some of the modern fighters.
While I agree that he was closer to Tyson physicaly the way he moved sounds quite reminiscent of Pattersons peek a bo style and leaping left hooks. I can see what you say about im being "if possible more agresive tha Tyson". He was just on his oponent from the opening bell and didnt get off them. He had to be since he was often fighting slick boxers over a distance of six rounds or less. Physicaly I would say he was naturaly bigger than Jack Dempsey or Rocky Marciano. He was generaly coming in at over 200 lbs except for in finish fights.
