Who was better - Peter Jackson or James Corbett?

All newspaper decisions are official no decisions, they gave just an indication. You just show again you don't know much about the matter you write, but just want to annoy, even when you got proven wrong dozens of times by me and others.

 

You make ridiculous statements and then get offended when you are asked to provide proof of them, You're not a poster,you're a VIRUS !

 

"If John L. Sullivan had been born 10 to 15 years later than he was, the story might be different. But he was the last of the old school. Footwork as a part of science of the game was undeveloped. Sullivan had none. He was a rusher and slugger and he could hit crushingly and accurately too. But he had to set for his best punches and it is ring history how defenseless the big fellow was against the dancing, jabbing, ducking, bewilderingly speedy Corbett.
Yet, even with the best of modern training in all branches of footwork and defense as well as aggression. I do not think Sullivan would have even reached the form to beat Dempsey or Johnson. But I do think he could have turned in a winning card against Corbett, for he would have been able to land some of his shattering punches, and Corbett while a courageous fighter, did not have the endurance to draw on of the other heavyweight champions." ~ JIMMY DE FOREST ~

This content is protected

 

Sullivan undoubtedly had some sort of footwork, and Corbett's success against him owed more to his condition than anything else.

 

Good effort. Thanks. But the embarrassment of good wins comment based on the size, records, and historical input of the opponents is well embarrassing to for a seasoned guy to say. This top five would not rate with other top five wins. Even a bad champion has better top five wins with the possible expectation of say two of them.

 

You know almost nothing about McCaffrey or Greenfield, let alone some of the earlier Sullivan opponents. You can't base your opinion of them on boxrec page, because fights weren't recorded back then. No record is complete from that era and most are basically non-existent.

The only objective data you can take is their size and weight (when they are available), but then again - we don't know a lot about most Sullivan opponents in that aspect as well.

 

The size and weight are grade D and history doesn’t remember any of them fondly with the Exception of Kirain being remotely great. In fact the list that Sullivan didn’t fight is much greater excuses that he was a far alcoholic drunk and under age 32 need not apply.

 

If you place a high value on size of opposition, then I admit, Sullivan doesn't stack up well against many other champions.

We don't even know what these fighters complete records were, or what they looked like on film.

Beyond their size, we cannot say much against them, with any degree of certainty.

It might be the case, that they could have beaten the top five opponents, of many other champions.

You just don't know.

 

You keep talking about the men that Sullivan didn't face, and then you keep coming out with the names of men whose primes were in the 1890s, when Sullivan was retired.

Between say 1880, and Sullivan's retirement 1889, he probably did either beat every meaningful contender, or beat somebody who had beaten them.

 

You are hypcrite as I often proved you wrong here (as Klompton and Mendoza as well), but you now took the opportunity when Boxrec is down since several days (without login there) that I can't temporarrly show it and humilate you again, because you are a coward and liar, as most people here know.

 

I haven't seen a single report saying about Jackson KDs either.

 

I have read it few years ago on a subpage of Boxrec, but this is at the moment not available (visible) or rather just for registrated member there.

If he got this win, then it is next to Sullivan possible his best. But I think Jackson was not much worse than Wills or Charles, clearly superior than Langford, Janette, Firpo and McVey.

 

Then create an account and send a proof, it's not that simple

 

He side stepped Peter Jackson and George Godfrey, two fighter with know records in the 1880's. Sullivan was a cruiser weight sized guy picking on super middles. Burke listed at 170, McCaffrey at 167.5 Supper middles and Mitchell 150 lbs a jr Middle. Cardiff listed at 185 and he deserved the decision against Sullivan! Sullivans so called best wins. They were small, not even light heavy weights. His competition fought is underwhelming and the ones he didn't but could have fought before Corbett are the fighters who were known and more natural heavyweights of the timeline.

To call who he fought as meaningful stretches the very definition of the word.

 

Are you dense or what?