Would John L Sullivan have been a dominant figure ..

Up to 1886/1887 and the Cardiff fight this is kinda true. The criticisms of Sullivan are still valid but there wasn't any clear alternatives he should have been fighting instead.

Afterwards it is not. The main problem with Sullivan isn't 1882-1889 its 1887-1892. Sullivans SOS before then could be attributed to the sport getting off the ground afterwards he was keeping his title through a whole generation based on his reputation.

"If that is not a dominant champion, then there is probably no such thing as a dominant champion".

If this is true plug Sullivans resume into the modern era. Someone with 28 of 37 wins being debutants would get raked over the coals. If you take all that away Sullivan has between 2 and 5 title defenses. Greenfield, Greenfield, Burke, McCaffrey, Herald. If you go with the admittedly baseless consensus of modern historians and say Sullivan won his title against McCaffrey he'd have 1 title defense. Part of why its so difficult to pinpoint exactly where Sullivans reign as champion began is Sullivan wasn't fighting the SOS we'd associate with a champion in any era. After the Mitchell fight Sullivan fought 14 debutants or near debutants in a row. Then he fought Greenfield twice who was 4-2 and would end up with a losing record. If a modern champion tried that they would not get praised for being a dominant champ.

At the start of Sullivan reign this was sort of normal(though not quite to that level) because everyone was building up their Queensbury records from scratch. Not that this really vindicates Sullivan fighting 27 debutants but its hard for the top guys to fight each other before we've established who they are. But that started to change in 1885,1886 and the other top fighters started fighting other top guys either every fight or frequently. And when the time to make this shift came Sullivan ran for the hills.

 

Did John L dominate LPR? Find me a single strictly LPR fight with no QB rules whatsoever that features John.

Did John L dominate QB? Find me a single strictly QB fight with no LPR rules involved that features Sullivan.




Say Ben Rothwell(BKFC/Gazette) challenges Oleksandr Usyk(WBA/O/C) to a mixed rules fight and wins. Then challenges Jon Jones(UFC) for a mixed rules match and wins.

Let's say the mixing of the rules is never consistent and made to order per fighter. For Usyk Ben can wrestle but for Jones no ground fighting is involved. Usyk loses to an armbar and JJ draws the strike contest despite observers admitting Jon did better Ben is handed a title because he's larger.

What sport did Ben in this scenario dominate?




Did John L fight Paddy in LPR? How about Jake? You sure? That John Flood fight y'all asked for sources on not long ago, LPR? No QB to that fight was there?



Challenged the right men and beat them sure enough. Not sure what sport he dominated. Guess you can call it boxing and leave it at that but this particular discussion is about QB.


If a man is losing a fight but changes the rules mid fight and proceeds to win under this mid fight rule change, what did that man win or prove? Makes him not only the first QB champion but also one of the best and most dominant does it?





John L is a transitional figure who can't be moved out of the transitional era. Smoked today. Smoked in the 18th century. His time is late 19th exclusively. There's no reason to believe a mixed rules fighter does anything is a defined rules sport. Especially since he doesn't even fight under a consistent mixing of rules. Ever.



The answer is Yes John L did fight one strict match that strictly adhered to a ruleset. When he lost to Corbett.

 

I will say, Boxrec is just god awful for Sully. Dunno TF they are doing but in general Boxrec is crap. I get it's the only service so fair enough but do not take sourceless resources as gospel. Boxrec or otherwise. They claim a fight they need a source or four.





Most them debuts are not debuts. Boxrec is just **** at history.

 

A couple of observations:

You can't really talk about Sullivan's opponents being debutants, because of the paucity of surviving records from the period.

The surviving records of most or perhaps even all of his opponents are almost certainly incomplete.

Sullivan was down against Charlie Mitchell, but it is not entirely clear from the accounts whither it was a knockdown or a slip.

Sullivan broke his arm in the Cardiff fight, and it later had to be re broken.

Even today you don't come back quickly from an injury like that.

Sullivan later suffered a near fatal bout of fever, that he was not expected to survive.

There were valid reasons for his inactivity over this period.

The one attribute that nobody at the time seems to have questioned in Sullivan was his power.

 

All of the above is true, but he could only fight under the rules that were possible at the time, and against the opposition that was available at the time.

As for how he would have done in later eras, or earlier eras, he was enough of a standout that none of the above rules out his getting to the top in stronger or more standardized eras.

 

There's an old film of Sulluvan they showed on HBO's legendary heavyweights of old man Sullivan squaring off with another fighter and firing punches but stopping them. His reflexes look quick, the other guy was flinching and John was smiling.
Legend has it he knocked out 400 men. He had to have something the average tough guy didnt have.

This content is protected

First segment on Sullivan.

 

Many are rightly pointing out the weakness of records from John L's day. Looking at news reports from his day leading up to the Flood and the Ryan fights, it is quite obvious that everyone involved had many fights under their collective belts. Ryan had a 12 week training camp and reportedly 500 followers accompanying him to MSG. That is not representative of a beginner.

And you can argue rulesets till the cows come to roost but at the end of the day it is a sport of physically defeating your opponent, primarily by punch. The sport today is not what it was in the 80's, in the 50's, in the 20's... It is not a permanent static procedure of dominance between two combatants but it is always a procedure of dominance, primarily done by fist.

But I will turn my attentions to physical man himself. John L was inarguably the most gifted specimen to enter the ring in his day, later days, our day... Scroll down on this page an behold those enormous, muscular, strength ridden hams, each coiled like a panther, ready to explode into combative action...

https://publicdomainreview.org/essay/john-l-sullivan-fights-america/

 

If you are consistent across your ratings, fair, if not then you give John special treatment. Simple as that.

I don't know either of you well enough to speak to that. I'd have to check post history, I'll take your words for it rather than get into all of that.

That said the defense is telling and super weak. Throw away the rule set you claim this man is champion over despite the fact he only ever loss under that rule set because pics of his physique doe?

Nah bro, maybe I am being narcissistic but I'm pretty sure my point about rules is a far better point then but him muscled doe. surely you were kidding.


To clarify, I have no issue with John L the boxer or the champion. John L the first QB champ is a lie. John L the last great LPR champ is a lie. John L the last great BK champ is true. It is nuanced but that's what forums are for.

 

I can't make heads or tails of this. Is English your first language. I do alright in Gaelic and Italian if not.

Anybody else?

 

We are trying to make sense of a very unclear period of boxing history, and I hope keeping all reasonable interpretations on the table.

 

Nil is agam. Sullivan would do pretty well in the 1890-1910 period IMO. His opposition in the early years was weakish but he dominated. Jack Burke, who seems to be ignored by most, is a good indicator of his ability. Jack boxed on even terms with Slavin, Mitchel, Cleary, Kilrain and many more but was outclassed by Sullivan. People are citing Fitz, Sullivan was retired by the time Fitz arrived as a contender, Goddard, Slavin, Jackson only arrived on the scene by the time Sullivan was virtually retired, Gus Lambert got a mention, he would have one in a hundred chance of defeating John L, the Sullivan of 1881-85 was a serious heavyweight, fast, vicious, strong, big puncher, fit... after that, yeah drink etc but that early animal crushes the Ruhlin, Sharkey, Choynski, probably Maher, Corbett too and I suspect Fitz.

 

You realize Burke was a middleweight, right ? We have zero to go on to make predictions that Sillivan beats any of the far more experienced M of Q fighters you mention like Fitz or Choynski ... if he could have if he actually was trained as a Q of M fighter for years and stayed in shape isa a complete other question ... I have always felt the man absolutely had many serious talents for sure.

 

Are you for real with that ? (specifically paragraph 2 )

 

Actually, I know Burke was a middleweight. You realise than Fitz, Mitchell and Choynski were middleweights,right?

 

The sport ultimately boils down to hitting and not being hit. You fancy lads make too much of it.

In the business of hitting and not being hit (mostly due to his hitting) John L. stands as Lord over all the species has produced.