Heavyweight Tourney:Rd 3:Wladimir Klitschko .Vs. John L. Sullivan

[la-califa]

Round 3 action. Wladimir Klitschko victorious over Gerry Cooney & Jefferies will be facing his strongest compeition in John L. Sullivan. Who has advanced thus far by defeating, Morrison & Jack Sharkey. Tough match up.

Please give reasoning for prediction. Please give predicted result.

Round 3. 15 Rounds.

[Boilermaker]

this is an interesting fight for sure.

John L always starts with a headbutt, i often read. I think he does in this one too and it hurts Vlad. The best version of Vlad stands straight and throws from range and clinches in close. His problem is that when he clinches John L, the fight is not over. He cops plent of decent shots in the clinches. John L had absolutely first class power and Vlad despite his advantages (and his own power) is going to be hit and hit hard by John L sullivan, regularly and from round one. I am yet to be convinced that Wlad can take these clean punches and continue to fight on bravely. I think that this looks a lot like sanders vlad i say John L wins in the 3rd round.

[janitor]

Everything that I know about Sullivan suggests that he would be a nightmare opponent for Wlad.

Sullivan was not some prehistoric version of George Chuvalo he was a dynamic offensive fighter in the mould of Floyd Patterson and Mike Tyson. I believe based on contemporary testimony that he was in the same category as Jack Dempsey as a finisher. I also believe that he had comparable speed.

Obviously my prediction has a healthy dose of extrapolation in it but I would be inclines to say Sullivan by TKO in the mid rounds say TKO6.

[ChrisPontius]

Sullivan fought under a completely different ruleset with tiny or no gloves, rounds that end when one is on the ground, etc. Wlad is great at his own ruleset and Sullivan at his, and i think Wlad would win behind the jab/right hand comfortably. John L carrying his hands by his waist wouldn't protect his chin from that anvil of a Klitschko right hand, either. Not to mention he's looking at gigantic size disadvantage. Wlad TKO10.

[Seamus]

Wlad KO 2. Under any circumstances imaginable.

[Jack]

Wlad KO 2. The size difference is too much.

[Bummy Davis]

Klitschko's jab is something out of space for Sullivan but the tough Irishman gives it his all, until the right hand levels him around the 7-8th rd.

[Boilermaker]

Sullivan fought under a completely different ruleset with tiny or no gloves, rounds that end when one is on the ground, etc. Wlad is great at his own ruleset and Sullivan at his, and i think Wlad would win behind the jab/right hand comfortably. John L carrying his hands by his waist wouldn't protect his chin from that anvil of a Klitschko right hand, either. Not to mention he's looking at gigantic size disadvantage. Wlad TKO10.

Did Sullivan carry his hands low?

[djanders]

Assuming he trained in a modern setting, I think John could adapt easily to the modern rules and would be very comfortable in a glove fight. From what I have seen, Wladimir would not be comfortable at all with the pressure John would bring to him in the ring. My pick is a John Sullivan win, by TKO, about round 4.

[Boilermaker]

Wlad KO 2. Under any circumstances imaginable.
So, who which world class fighter did Vlad ever beat in 2 rounds. The closest he ever came was the 2nd round tko of Tim Austin, who was pretty much about on the same level as most of the Sullivan victims. Vlad would certainly want to hope that the fight goes more than 2 rounds because if it doesnt, i fear that this would be a corrie Sanders style beating all over again.

[ChrisPontius]

Did Sullivan carry his hands low?

[Only registered and activated users can see links]



[Only registered and activated users can see links]


[Only registered and activated users can see links]


[Only registered and activated users can see links]


But hey, despite all that evidence, with Janitor's imagination he fought from a peek a boo gloved boxing's Patterson/Tyson style.

[Mr Butt]

i would like to say sullivan as i find klit negative and he looks scared when people come forward with purpose against him but i see the modern rules giving klit an advantage and the modern refs will probably break the fighters quicker so i will go for klit by ud but it would not surprise me to much to see sullivan win by stoppage

[RonnieHornschuh]

I think the more boxing historians study ancient fighters the more they tend to overrate them. Half of Sullivan's fights were against opponents that didn't have a single fight! And you think with a stance like that and no upper body movement, he wouldn't get hit all the time? Not to mention that Wlad is an olympic gold medalist of 6'6 and 245 pounds.
Wlad by KO whenever he wants it.

[janitor]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]



[Only registered and activated users can see links]


[Only registered and activated users can see links]


[Only registered and activated users can see links]


But hey, despite all that evidence, with Janitor's imagination he fought from a peek a boo gloved boxing's Patterson/Tyson style.

I produced an analysis based on multiple eyewitness acounts of Sullivan fighting in gloved contests.

All you have here is a picture of Sullivan in a bareknuckle fight, which is not representative of his stance in gloved contests, and a few posed photographs which are not particularly representative of anything.

[janitor]

Wlad KO 2. Under any circumstances imaginable.

I would give Sullivan a good shot at beating any heavyweight who ever lived, in either a bareknuckle fight of unlimited duration, or a queensbury bout of six rounds.

Sullivan was primarily a Queensbury fighter who specialised in short bouts of six rounds or less where he had to work against the clock for every second of every round. He only fought with bare knuckles due to the politics of the time.

[frankenfrank]

this is an interesting fight for sure.

John L always starts with a headbutt, i often read. I think he does in this one too and it hurts Vlad. The best version of Vlad stands straight and throws from range and clinches in close. His problem is that when he clinches John L, the fight is not over. He cops plent of decent shots in the clinches. John L had absolutely first class power and Vlad despite his advantages (and his own power) is going to be hit and hit hard by John L sullivan, regularly and from round one. I am yet to be convinced that Wlad can take these clean punches and continue to fight on bravely. I think that this looks a lot like sanders vlad i say John L wins in the 3rd round.
sullivan's head won't reach wlad's chin.
sullivan does not last more than 8 rounds to be generous with him.
no more than 6 to be realistic.

[frankenfrank]

Wlad KO 2. Under any circumstances imaginable.
but yes , this is even more realistic.

Wlad KO 2. The size difference is too much.
and this too.

[mckay_89]

Wlad by early KO, too much of a size difference and Sullivans skills are primitive in comparison.

Also, like it or not but Wlad is the best in the world at this moment in time, whereas when Sullivan was 'World Champ', he was actually champion of white men in America.

[janitor]

[quote=mckay_89;5441209]Wlad by early KO, too much of a size difference and Sullivans skills are primitive in comparison.

I would submit that Sullivans skillset was in no way more primitive than Wlad's.

It migfht have reflected different conditions but it was in its own way verry refined.

Also, like it or not but Wlad is the best in the world at this moment in time, whereas when Sullivan was 'World Champ', he was actually champion of white men in America.

It dosn't really make much odds because there wern't any serious black contenders untill fairly late in Sullivans reign.

[Unforgiven]

John L. Sullivan by 1st round KO.

Wlad's going out on a stretcher, with the first bell still ringing in our ears.

John L. was just too much of a beast.

Look, it's like this :

1. his style was impetuous
2. his defense was impregnable
3. he was just ferocious.

Nuff said.

[BlackWater]

John L. Sullivan by 1st round KO.

Wlad's going out on a stretcher, with the first bell still ringing in our ears.

John L. was just too much of a beast.

Look, it's like this :

1. his style was impetuous
2. his defense was impregnable
3. he was just ferocious.

Nuff said.

An '88 Tyson would leave Wlad in a crumpled heap in 1 round, but in terms of Sullivan-Klitschko I think it could go either way. Wlad would be the biggest man he had ever faced physically, right? And I think that Wlad has never faced anyone with a style like Sullivan. In any case, I don't think the fight goes past 6.

[DudeGuyMan]

Sullivan wouldn't know what the hell was happening to him. Wlad KO1, and I consider the Klitschkos merely the best of a very bad era. I see this squat little near-cruiserweight walking out and throwing his fists up in that ridiculous stance you see in every single fists-up picture of him, and getting a chortle out of the crowd.

[janitor]

Sullivan wouldn't know what the hell was happening to him. Wlad KO1, and I consider the Klitschkos merely the best of a very bad era. I see this squat little near-cruiserweight walking out and throwing his fists up in that ridiculous stance you see in every single fists-up picture of him, and getting a chortle out of the crowd.

And yet nobody who has researched Sullivan is dismissing his chances.

People who called it for the Klitschko's against Corbett, Fitzsimmons and even Jeffries are picking Sullivan.

[guilalah]

Would pick the Wlad of today to beat the JL of 1882.

If they came along at the same time, would pick Jawn to open up a major can of woop-ass.

[Unforgiven]

No man living or dead could have beaten a prime John L.

I dont even rate Sullivan in my top 20 heavyweights of all-time, really because it would be unfair to mix him in with mere mortals. It's a worthless comparison.
John L. was NOT a great fighter like those others, he was just ferocious. It would be like ranking a Bengal Tiger against men.
Outside of the ring, John L. might have been a man, a great man. But inside the ring he was something otherworldly, a demon perhaps, an animal surely.
I want people to understand this.

His style was impetuous, if you could even call it a "style". And his defense was impregnable, but to call it a "defense" makes it sound too mortal, too refined, feminine even. There aren't really words to describe him, he was the one and only great John L., and, for want of a better expression, he was just ferocious.

The era he fought in was full of men hardened through hardship and chaos, and the men he fought were the roughest and toughest, and demi-gods and diablos in their own right.
And John L. was the most godly and the most diabolical of all beings, he stood alone in that time.
So imagine what he'd do against a mere mortal and vulnerable fighter of this era, like Wlad Klitschko.

As the great Reg Gutteridge once said, "It was about as one-sided as a lynching", and Sullivan preying on Wlad Klitschko would, quite literally, be as bad as a lynching.

I would campaign against the fight being made, and pray for Wladimir Klitschko, and pray for Sullivan's dark soul too. This mismatch would destroy any justification for the continuation of boxing.

Sullivan KO1 Klitschko.

[PowerPuncher]

Wlad KO1 within 60seconds, complete miss match in every sense

[janitor]

Wlad KO1 within 60seconds, complete miss match in every sense

So when did Wlad stop anybody in the first round?

[Flea Man]

As much as I love the idea of John L being this unbelievable pugilist with an unfathomable style with the punch of Joe Louis, I say he walks forward and eats the jab for a while, tries to throw a punch and gets jabbed again. A more fearsome fighter would decimate John L then, a Tyson or Foreman but Wlad is too cautious. Like Ray Austin, Sullivan lasts into round two. I'd LOVE a time machine to be able to get John L to fight Jerry Quarry, or Ron Lyle, or better still someone like Monte Barrett. Just to get a gauge of how well he couldve fared against the greats. Then put him in with Ali :rofl if he survived them, which I doubt he would. Would love it if he were awesome though, fascinating fighter.

[teeto]

As much as I love the idea of John L being this unbelievable pugilist with an unfathomable style with the punch of Joe Louis, I say he walks forward and eats the jab for a while, tries to throw a punch and gets jabbed again. A more fearsome fighter would decimate John L then, a Tyson or Foreman but Wlad is too cautious. Like Ray Austin, Sullivan lasts into round two. I'd LOVE a time machine to be able to get John L to fight Jerry Quarry, or Ron Lyle, or better still someone like Monte Barrett. Just to get a gauge of how well he couldve fared against the greats. Then put him in with Ali :rofl if he survived them, which I doubt he would. Would love it if he were awesome though, fascinating fighter.
I'll just agree with this.

[janitor]

I'd LOVE a time machine to be able to get John L to fight Jerry Quarry, or Ron Lyle, or better still someone like Monte Barrett. Just to get a gauge of how well he couldve fared against the greats.

That is always the bottom line.

Reconstructing Sullivan is a bit like reconstructing a Dinosaur from its skeleton.

I have looked at the Dinosaur skeleton and deduced that it bellonged to a T rex but that still leaves a lot of room for interpretation.

[Flea Man]

Teeto: :lol:

Janitor, it is indeed open to interpretation. On John L, even if I discount him, I'm glad to recount him (does that even make sense) what I mean is that I'm a fan, even if I don't rate his chances against Burns or Sharkey, let alone Louis, Holmes, Lewis, Liston. Still think he wouldn't give a fuck and would attempt to beat them senseless! Just that I don't feel he'd have that much success attempting it. I just believe that boxing got more and more refined until we got to the 30's. Tunney's era was the era of the innovators IMO, and from Louis onwards people have just refining it, changing it, whatever. Skill levels really peaked from then onwards and I'm in the firm belief that the class of 30-85 is as about as close to the best it will ever be. There are of course exceptions, bit I think there are a skant few before (Greb, Tunney, Dempsey, Loughran etc) and after (Pea, Lewis, Tyson, well there are quite a few here but I believe the best practitioners of the sport came around Charles, Robinson, Armstrong, Ross,Burley years across the board at all weights, continuing onto Ali and ending, at large around the end of Haglers prime) that I feel could REALLY compete in the time of regular fights of 8, 10, 12 and 15 rounds fighting the best competition the sport has ever offered.

[Boilermaker]

Teeto: :lol:

Janitor, it is indeed open to interpretation. On John L, even if I discount him, I'm glad to recount him (does that even make sense) what I mean is that I'm a fan, even if I don't rate his chances against Burns or Sharkey, let alone Louis, Holmes, Lewis, Liston. Still think he wouldn't give a fuck and would attempt to beat them senseless! Just that I don't feel he'd have that much success attempting it. I just believe that boxing got more and more refined until we got to the 30's. Tunney's era was the era of the innovators IMO, and from Louis onwards people have just refining it, changing it, whatever. Skill levels really peaked from then onwards and I'm in the firm belief that the class of 30-85 is as about as close to the best it will ever be. There are of course exceptions, bit I think there are a skant few before (Greb, Tunney, Dempsey, Loughran etc) and after (Pea, Lewis, Tyson, well there are quite a few here but I believe the best practitioners of the sport came around Charles, Robinson, Armstrong, Ross,Burley years across the board at all weights, continuing onto Ali and ending, at large around the end of Haglers prime) that I feel could REALLY compete in the time of regular fights of 8, 10, 12 and 15 rounds fighting the best competition the sport has ever offered.

You dont give him a chance against Sharkey? The end of Sullivans career coincided with the start of Sharkeys career. That was one hell of a year of refining done there! Actually they did fight exhibitions a few years after Sullivan retired. Wonder if Sullivan looked totally unrefined in those exhibitions?

[Flea Man]

You dont give him a chance against Sharkey? The end of Sullivans career coincided with the start of Sharkeys career. That was one hell of a year of refining done there! Actually they did fight exhibitions a few years after Sullivan retired. Wonder if Sullivan looked totally unrefined in those exhibitions?

I personally feel that Sullivans style would not have made much of a transition at all. I know how many fights he had before he fought Corbett, I know how jr was an advocate for gloves and probably adapted his style from bareknuckle to gloved, bit Sharkey clearly competed well with later Heavys. I never said I was an expert on those times anyway, only that I'm interested in that period and that based on the footage I've seen (including Fitzsimmons) I don't feel ANY of them, Corbett included would fare well against many post 1920 heavyweights. It's only from footage, and of course there is none of John L other than the squaring up he does as an older man, but as I say I'd love to be proven wrong. It's only opinion, you've made it clear you're not open to interpretation at all on the subject.

[Boilermaker]

I personally feel that Sullivans style would not have made much of a transition at all. I know how many fights he had before he fought Corbett, I know how jr was an advocate for gloves and probably adapted his style from bareknuckle to gloved, bit Sharkey clearly competed well with later Heavys. I never said I was an expert on those times anyway, only that I'm interested in that period and that based on the footage I've seen (including Fitzsimmons) I don't feel ANY of them, Corbett included would fare well against many post 1920 heavyweights. It's only from footage, and of course there is none of John L other than the squaring up he does as an older man, but as I say I'd love to be proven wrong. It's only opinion, you've made it clear you're not open to interpretation at all on the subject.

Fair enough, but what is it you understand about his style?

We really need one of those style posts that Cross trainer did with Fitzsimmons. In Sullivan, i imagine someone that punches with the same timing and power (roughly) of prime Tyson. He seems to have that Concussive style punch that takes away fighters equilibriums (to me). I dont think that he throws as many hooks or uppercuts as Tyson (although he might), but i think his combinations are more often the longer and straighter punches.

When people talk of skills, i really dont think that there is any doubt that skills does not include ability to throw a punch because he had all time KO power, imo. Defence is interesting. Unless i am mistaken, unlike those who came shortly after him, Sullivan actually employed a high guard not a low guard, from what i can understand. Again this is something that pioneers are often criticised for by people who say the sport evolved. I do get the feeling though that similar to Tyson, he switched the hands a little bit. AS we discuss further, it starts to get a little away from my knowledge and you need input from guys like Janitor or Cross trainer or even the greatest on this subject - Appollack.

In any case, my point is that given that at worst he is a huge puncher, with a first rate chin, first rate KO Power, and first rate heart and stamina, is it not almost certain that this is the type of fighter that Vlad would hate to fight the most?

[ChrisPontius]

Also, like it or not but Wlad is the best in the world at this moment in time, whereas when Sullivan was 'World Champ', he was actually champion of white men in America.

This is a very good point that is often overlooked.

How good were his opponents? There are a few "key" opponents like Kilrain, but my impression is that the vast majority are local strongmen (whatever that is) who challenge the man that thinks he can lick any WHITE man in the saloon.

Were there even ratings at all? Information distribution was primitive back then. Even something that is trivial today, like traveling wasn't easy back then. Railroad construction was just starting in the 1870's. What about the rest of America?

What about all of the "colored" talent? What about European fighters? Australian? Latin American?

[cross_trainer]

This is a very good point that is often overlooked.

How good were his opponents? There are a few "key" opponents like Kilrain, but my impression is that the vast majority are local strongmen (whatever that is) who challenge the man that thinks he can lick any WHITE man in the saloon.

Were there even ratings at all? Information distribution was primitive back then. Even something that is trivial today, like traveling wasn't easy back then. Railroad construction was just starting in the 1870's. What about the rest of America?

What about all of the "colored" talent? What about European fighters? Australian? Latin American?

A problem that vexes any cross-era comparison. Klitschko comes from a larger talent pool than Ali, who comes from a larger talent pool than Louis, who comes from a larger talent pool than John L....if only because of raw population stats.

:think

[janitor]

Janitor, it is indeed open to interpretation. On John L, even if I discount him, I'm glad to recount him (does that even make sense) what I mean is that I'm a fan, even if I don't rate his chances against Burns or Sharkey, let alone Louis, Holmes, Lewis, Liston.

Lets start by comparing Sullivan to fighters close to his time.

He was almost certainly the most destructive heavyweight puncher of the gloved era before Sam Langford came allong.

As a champion and an athletic talent he was a lot closer to the level of Jim Jeffries and Jack Johnson than to Jim Corbett and Bob Fitzsimmons.

It is probably fair to say that Tommy Burns would not have had a cat in hells chance against him. When you get to sombody like Jack Sharkey enough has changed to create uncertainties but the smart money would have to be on Sullivans talent over Sharkeys inconsistency.

[janitor]

Fair enough, but what is it you understand about his style?

We really need one of those style posts that Cross trainer did with Fitzsimmons.

I will re post my detailed breakdown of Sullivans style based on Adam Pollacks research.

[janitor]

How good were his opponents? There are a few "key" opponents like Kilrain, but my impression is that the vast majority are local strongmen (whatever that is) who challenge the man that thinks he can lick any WHITE man in the saloon.


No wishing to get on at you but your impresion is based on predudice, presumption, guesswork.

Basicaly everything apart from researching the era.

[Flea Man]

Gain, it's more out of me not really rating Corbett based on the small footage of him. I know for a fat that Sullivan was very battleqorn by the time he fought Corbett die to all his barelnuckle contests plus advancing years and gloved boxing, but if he really were as phenomenal as you're suggesting, he shouldve been able to overcome a fighter that really didn't look all that to me. A I sayy knowledge isn't that great, I guess you could give me more of an indication of just how shot John L really was. I assume with his advanced skill and power he must nit have been that damaged even though he'd had so many fights. What are accounts like of his most important heavyweight gloved fights? Was he hard to hit as well as a hard hitter?

[ChrisPontius]

A problem that vexes any cross-era comparison. Klitschko comes from a larger talent pool than Ali, who comes from a larger talent pool than Louis, who comes from a larger talent pool than John L....if only because of raw population stats.

:think

I think the decline of boxing's popularity since the 70's (or even 50's) has more or less compensated the increase in total population, keeping it somewhat constant. This is just a hypothesis though, but both factors undeniably have their influence. Since the 2000's, boxing's popularity (and necessity) has dropped to an all-time low in America, but at the same time, it's at an all time high in Eastern Europe, and they're allowed to turn pro, as are the Cubans.

[ChrisPontius]

No wishing to get on at you but your impresion is based on predudice, presumption, guesswork.

Basicaly everything apart from researching the era.

Do you have fight records of his opponents? And i'm not talking about the three biggest names on his resume. How many opponents did they fought? In turn, what were their records? How much competition was there at all? Was there a ranking system? A New York Athletic commission that kept track of those things?

[janitor]

Reconstructing the style of John L Sullivan

All of the following statements are taken from men who actually saw John L Sullivan spar from Ringside. They therefore represent a first hand account of his style. Most of the quotes have been take from Adam Pollack’s biography of John L Sullivan.

“He can strike out with either right or left and knock a man down with as much ease and grace as an accomplished lady can gently and languidly open an opera fan”

National Police Gazette


Stance
The consensus of contemporary observers seems to be that Sullivan fought leaning forward with his weigh resting on his front foot. It seems that he threw straight punches from the shoulder and could really get his body behind the punches like Rocky Marciano. He seems to have used his crouch defensively and to have ducked low to avoid punishment.

“The secret of the champions prowess is apparent. He carries his strongly muscled shoulders forward. The consequence is that when he delivers a blow he doesn’t have to bring the upper part of his body forward in the delivery. The arm straightens out and the blow is with a suddenness which seems paralysing to the spectators, to say nothing of the man in front of him. He stands with one foot well behind and his body pressing forward”.

St Louis paper quoted by Adam Pollack

“The superiority of Sullivan lies in his extraordinary nervous force and altogether incomparable skill as a boxer. In what does this extraordinary skill consist? In hitting as straight and almost as rapid as light, in the variety and rediness of his blows, in standing firmly on his feet and driving his whole weight and nervous force at the end of his fist- a very rare and high quality in a boxer, in movements as quick and purposeful as the leap of a lion. He can duck lower than any featherweight boxer in America”.

John Boyle O’Reiley

Although Sullivan planted his feet and put most of his body weight behind his blows he seems to have also employed leaps to close distance or fire a punch over an opponents guard:

“Here again Sullivan showed the terrific force with which he delivers his blows jumping forward on his right leg and at the same time apparently and throwing the weight of his whole massive body onto his arms. The movement is executed with lightning like rapidity and it certainly seems that no man can stand up to it”.

San Francisco Chronicle

“The first thing a professor will teach a pupil is to stand in position. He will teach him how to turn his toes out spread his feet so many inches apart, and will try to convince the young man that this position is the only correct one in the world. Now I consider that this is all simple rot. My advice is to stand in whatever way is best suited for your purpouse-whichever way you can hit your opponent the straightes hardes blow and avoid a return by getting away quickly”.

John L Sullivan


Style
It is my contention that Sullivan was a Queensbury rules fighter first and foremost with an offensive come forward style. He seems to have been a rushing aggressive fighter who came forward from the opening bell and set a high work-rate. He also seems to have been a scientific offensive fighter who used a low crouch. The closest comparison on film would be somebody like Jack Dempsey or Floyd Patterson. He seems to have been a two fisted fighter for most of his career but he became dependant on his right hand after he broke his left against Patsy Cardiff. He threw wide punches early in his career but later straightened them and made them more compact.

Sullivan’s style of fighting differed from that of any other pugilist that has entered the ring of late years. He is a rusher, and it is this quality and his tremendous hitting powers that really make him a great pugilist. Beside he is a skilful wrestler and a good infighter, quick to dodge and always on the alert for any opening an opponent may leave.

Times Democrat

“He can strike more heavy blows in ten seconds than any other man in a minute and watches with self possession and calculation. Other boxers begin by sparring but he begins by fighting and he never ceases to fight. Sullivan is fierce relentless tireless as a cataract. He does not waste ten seconds of the three minutes of each round”.

John Boyle O’Reiley

“I have seldom seen a man who advances the truth which is that Sullivan is as clever as any man. His unquestioned ability as being the hardest hitter ever seen has caused overlooking of the fact that his blow is always planted where it will do the most good either on the jaw or jugular. The truth is that Sullivan is a careful scientific fighter”.

Chicago Herald

“The essentials of a good fighter are pluck skill endurance and a good head on his shoulders. A man fights with his head almost as much as he does with his fists. He must know where to send his blows so that they will do the most good. He must economise his strength and not score a hit just for the sake of scoring it. I endeavour to hit my man above the heart or under the chin or behind the ear. A man wears out pretty soon if one can keep hammering away at the region of the heart, a blow behind the ear will knock a man out quicker than a hundred on the cheek or any other portion of the face”.

“Learn to strike straight and clean, swinging blows nearly always leave you open for your opponent. It is well to do your leading with the left reserving the right for any good openings. Wherever you hit your man with one hand let the other fist land in the same spot if possible”.

“Always watch your opponent. Just as soon as you see him about to lead shoot your left into his face. The force of him coming towards you will increase the blow considerably”.

John L Sullivan

[janitor]

Head movement
I believe that Sullivan used head movement to avoid punched coming in a similar manner to Jack Dempsey and Floyd Patterson decades later.

“Sullivan showed one point of his science by quick movements of his head completely eluding on such occasions the heavy blows which were aimed by McDonald”

Denver Tribune Republican

A New Orleans quoted by Adam Pollack paper described Sullivan as:

“a man weighing 230 pounds who moved rapidly and was spryer on his feet than the majority of lightweights. Sullivan uses both hands well and hits clean. He dodged and guarded splendidly”.


Hand and foot speed
It is probable that Sullivan’s hand speed was on a par with that of Jack Dempsey and it might perhaps have been even better.

Joe Choynski once fought an exhibition with John L Sullivan. While Sullivan was touring Australia he was interviewed by an Australian journalist and questioned about how Sullivan might have fared against Peter Jackson and Joe Goddard. His answers give a possible insight into the hand speed of John L Sullivan. On Goddard he said:

“I don’t think he would have a ghost of a show with Sullivan. You see its this way. Sullivan is quicker than I am and he hits with terrible power. If I had a tenth of Sullivan’s force Id have beaten Goddard both times I fought him. Now its easy to figure out. I honestly think that John would smash him down with little trouble”.

If we take Choynski at his word that Sullivan had faster hands than him then it is quite instructive because we have footage of Choynski sparring with Jim Jeffries:

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

On the question of whether Sullivan could catch Peter Jackson Choynski said:

“You have never seen Sully fight Smiler. His right arm don’t do any swinging, it come across like a flash of lightning with a jerk, and if he misses he is so quick you can’t get your head out of range before he’s back ready for another shot at your jaw and how it does fly ping ping”.


Power
It is my contention that Sullivan’s power was up there with the hardest hitting fighters of comparable weight such as Jack Dempsey Rocky Marciano and Mike Tyson.

“I never faced another man who could begin to hit as hard and I don’t believe that there is another man like him in the country”.

“One thing is for certain, any man Sullivan can hit he can whip”.

“He hit hard enough to break down any mans guard I know of”.

Paddy Ryan

“One thing is for certain and that is that neither Mace or Sayers ever encountered so hard or so quick a hitter as in John L Sullivan. It was this writers fortune to see the fight between Heenan and Morrissey and had Sullivan been on the boards that day it is my opinion that he could have whipped them both one after the other. Those who think that he is not a thoroughly scienced man are mistaken. He has a far better knowledge of the fistic art than either Heenan or Morrissey possessed. He is stronger than either and unquestionably he is the hardest hitter known to the records of the ring”.

National Police Gazette

“Probably no man has yet presented himself in the prize ring of America who could withstand the impact of Sullivan’s fist when it shoots out from the shoulder with the intent of doing harm”.

St Paul Daily Globe


Stylistic legacy
It is my belief that Sullivan was the first scientific offensive fighter of the gloved era and the evolutionary predecessor of Terry McGovern, Jack Dillon, Jack Dempsey and ultimately Mike Tyson.

“Sullivan’s method of sparring is beyond criticism. It is the basis of the modern school, and to its system of throwing the weight with the leads and follows is due the terrible execution with soft gloves that has become more or less common since Sullivan’s time”.

Denver Daily News

One fighter who was compared to Sullivan during his career was Terry McGovern. It is possible that it we could see film of Sullivan in his prime he would have looked something like this:

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[janitor]

[quote=ChrisPontius;5446382]Do you have fight records of his opponents? And i'm not talking about the three biggest names on his resume. How many opponents did they fought? In turn, what were their records?

Most records of the period are fragmentary even at elite level but you can look at how the fighters were regarded in the press and the level of experience they were believed to have.

How much competition was there at all?

A lot more per head of population than there is today.

It was an era in transition between two era's that verifiably had enormous talent depth. In many ways Sullivan stepped into the void between these two eras but it is against the fighters in these eras that he would ultimately be compared.

Was there a ranking system? A New York Athletic commission that kept track of those things?

Every state had its own athletic comission that regulated the terms under which fights took place e.g. rule set glove size duration etc.

[janitor]

I guess you could give me more of an indication of just how shot John L really was.

Sullivan was far past his prime when he fought Jake Killrain.

He had shattered his left arm in a bout against Patst Cardiff which basicaly made him into a one armed fighter as oposed to the two fisted attacker of his heyday. He had a severe bout of fever which nearly killed him and was actualy on crutches when he signed the contract to fight Killrain. Add to this the fact that years of alcoholism had disipated him.

He was prety much an empty shell when he fought Corbett.

[196osh]

Wlad KO within a couple of rounds.

There is a point where boxing really was hardly even a compareable sport to what it is now. The late 1800's definatly fall into this catagory.

[JIm Broughton]

Try as I might I have a very hard time picturing Sullivan beating Klitschko. Sullivan may have been quite the fighter for his time but lets face it, how many good big men were there in Sullivans time? How many of them employed a fast hard consistent jab or modern style combinations? My guess is that Sullivan relied more on brute force than skill to defeat his opponents, the majority of which were nowhere near the size and skill of Wlad. Throw the 2 of them in a dirt ring with bare knuckles and I'll pick John L. Put them in a modern ring with modern rules and Klitschko wins by KO everytime.

[PetethePrince]

You can't pick Sullivan because it's too much to ask for. It's irresponsible thinking.

[janitor]

[quote=JIm Broughton;5447847]Try as I might I have a very hard time picturing Sullivan beating Klitschko. Sullivan may have been quite the fighter for his time but lets face it, how many good big men were there in Sullivans time?

To be fair Sullivans key oponents were all under 200 lbs but you could say the same thing about Rocky Marciano.

How many of them employed a fast hard consistent jab or modern style combinations?

These things had all been around for some years at this point.

My guess is that Sullivan relied more on brute force than skill to defeat his opponents,

The your guess is not only wrong but about as far wrong as you can get.

Read the contemporary testimonies I posted about Sullivan.

This was clearly a verry refined offensive fighter and a verry cerebral fighter.

[Squire]

from what i've read on this guy in this thread, he is obviously a legend of his time, but does anybody honestly see him walking out in front of 50,000 people in Germany and having the skillset to KO Wladimir Klitschko? I don't.

[DudeGuyMan]

I could probably dig up some contemporary accounts of how Diagoras of Rhodes was a bad mofo too, but it doesn't mean he's hopping out of the time machine and whipping a Klitschko.

Can anyone find a picture of Sullivan in a boxing stance that wouldn't draw laughter from any boxing crowd of the last eighty years? Because I'm trawling Google Images and I can't.

[Mendoza]

Sullivan was a legend, but upon close examination he had his hands full in some fights, and his resume of wins over top gloved fighters is on the thin side. Wlad has too many advantages here. I'd pick him via TKO in the mid rounds.

[Seamus]

I would also pick Charlie Mitchell over Wlad.




(commence guffawing)

[ChrisPontius]

Janitor, what you posted is mostly wishful thinking. I mean come on. You find one quote on "head movement" and then say he fights like Patterson and Dempsey? You do realize that every single boxer, regardless of style, employs head movement? You do realize that Patterson's style is extremely stupid with no or tiny gloves? You found a Dodo's skull and you're reconstructing it into a T-rex, using a lot of imagination.


Like others say: Sullivan was great for his time, but he has never faced anything remotely close to Wladmir Klitschko. He hasn't faced a modern, much larger competition pool where blacks aren't excluded... hell, he hasn't even faced modern boxing rules at all. You don't enter a Formula 1 race with a rally car. Maybe the rally car (Sullivan) is rough and tougher in a long draw, but under it's own rules, the F1 car annihilates the rally car.

[Squire]

its quite funny that a 19th century fighter is being compared to a 21st century fighter. put into perspective, its like comparing the heavweight champion of year 2120 with a Klitschko :tong

[TheGreatA]

Perhaps Sullivan could pull it off by abusing the London Prize Ring rules (read about the second Sullivan-Mitchell fight) but there's really no way to possibly predict how he could do against a Klitschko under modern rules of boxing.

I would rather see Wladimir qualify here because when it comes to John L. Sullivan, we can only guess how good he could have been. With Wladimir, we know.

[Unforgiven]

Too many joke posts on this thread. But I'm starting to wonder .....
....... do any of you guys seriously believe Klitschko has any sort of chance against Sullivan ?
:huh

[janitor]

[quote=ChrisPontius;5451071]Janitor, what you posted is mostly wishful thinking. I mean come on. You find one quote on "head movement" and then say he fights like Patterson and Dempsey? You do realize that every single boxer, regardless of style, employs head movement? You do realize that Patterson's style is extremely stupid with no or tiny gloves? You found a Dodo's skull and you're reconstructing it into a T-rex, using a lot of imagination.

My analysis is not based on a small number of hand picked sources it is representative of all the contemporary sourcs that I have seen. If you think that you could select an alternative set of contemporary sources that presented a different picture then feel free to try.

However, since you have raise the issue of how representative my sources might be it is only fair to explain what points can be constrained and how.

On the issue of Sullivans stance we have a verry clear picture coroborated by multiple sources. The contemporary acounts describe his stance verry explicity and in such a way that it leaves no room for interpretation, making this the strongest part of my analysis. Sullivan clearly employed a similar stance to fighters like Dempsey if nothoing else.

On the issue of his head movment the acounts are less clear. Many obsevers make refference to it but they do not describe the nature of it in any detail. This is the biggest uncertainty in my analysis. Descriptions of Sullivans footwork are a lot more detailed and make it clear exactly how he employed it.

In terms of his punching everyboy says the same thing. Straight, fast, powerfull.

Like others say: Sullivan was great for his time, but he has never faced anything remotely close to Wladmir Klitschko. He hasn't faced a modern, much larger competition pool where blacks aren't excluded... hell, he hasn't even faced modern boxing rules at all.

You don't enter a Formula 1 race with a rally car. Maybe the rally car (Sullivan) is rough and tougher in a long draw, but under it's own rules, the F1 car annihilates the rally car.


Would you ever consider that Sullivan might have been much better suited to the moern ruleset than Jeffries or even some later champions?

Crazy as it sounds that might be the case.

Sullivan specialised in shorter duration Queensbury rules bouts, usualy limited to six rounds or so. A twelve round distance would probably suit him prety well.

[janitor]

[quote=DudeGuyMan;5449840]I could probably dig up some contemporary accounts of how Diagoras of Rhodes was a bad mofo too, but it doesn't mean he's hopping out of the time machine and whipping a Klitschko.

Don't focus on the quotes that say that Sullivan was a bad mofo.

Focus on the quotes that describe his style as a fighter and remember that the devil is in the detail.

Can anyone find a picture of Sullivan in a boxing stance that wouldn't draw laughter from any boxing crowd of the last eighty years? Because I'm trawling Google Images and I can't.

Look at a posed photo of Marvin Hagler.

People would laugh at him if he turned up in the ring like that.

What we have of Sullivan is posed photographs and pictures of the Killrain fight wich was a bareknuckle afair.

[janitor]

Perhaps Sullivan could pull it off by abusing the London Prize Ring rules (read about the second Sullivan-Mitchell fight) but there's really no way to possibly predict how he could do against a Klitschko under modern rules of boxing.


If you let Sullivan choose the rules than I guarantee that he would request a queensbury bout.

[JohnThomas1]

Also, like it or not but Wlad is the best in the world at this moment in time, whereas when Sullivan was 'World Champ', he was actually champion of white men in America.

Some might say Vitali is

:smoke

[Flea Man]

Some might say Vitali is

:smoke

I must say JT, I believe Wlad is. I do think that Vitali would beat him if they fought, I just like Wlads tight gameplans over Vitalis awkward effectiveness. Fair play to Vitali though, he is fighting regularly, as his Brother did before his recent injury.

[JohnThomas1]

I must say JT, I believe Wlad is. I do think that Vitali would beat him if they fought, I just like Wlads tight gameplans over Vitalis awkward effectiveness. Fair play to Vitali though, he is fighting regularly, as his Brother did before his recent injury.

You're probably right, based as much on career stage as anything really.

You get my point tho, some would definitely have Vitali there and it's unfortunate neither has nor will ever beat the other.

The fact is neither beat the best or next best Heavyweight during their entire tenure.

What an unfortunate yet incredible occurance.

[Flea Man]

You're probably right, based as much on career stage as anything really.

You get my point tho, some would definitely have Vitali there and it's unfortunate neither has nor will ever beat the other.

The fact is neither beat the best or next best Heavyweight during their entire tenure.

What an unfortunate yet incredible occurance.

Agreed, which is exactly why I'd like Chambers of Haye to beat one each and then fight each other (or for one of them to beat both) which is an unlikely but satisfying scenario.

[JohnThomas1]

Agreed, which is exactly why I'd like Chambers of Haye to beat one each and then fight each other (or for one of them to beat both) which is an unlikely but satisfying scenario.

How much do you feel not fighting each other (well 1 vs 2) hurts their legacy?

[TheGreatA]

If you let Sullivan choose the rules than I guarantee that he would request a queensbury bout.

He did prefer the Marquess of Queensbury rules but he was also experienced fighting under the London Prize Ring rules which would likely work to his advantage in this particular match-up. I'm not sure if Wladimir would be standing up after 20 or 30 rounds, provided that Sullivan knew how to work the rules to his advantage much like Kilrain and Mitchell did against him.

Withstand the early storm and make the fight into an endurance contest. We have seen Wladimir out of it against Puritty and Brewster who basically took his best and stayed there until Wladimir had nothing left. We also know that Sullivan has had quite a few prolonged battles, with himself coming out the victor.

That'd be his best chance in my opinion.

[janitor]

The fact is neither beat the best or next best Heavyweight during their entire tenure.

What an unfortunate yet incredible occurance.

Of course if they did fight they couldn't both loose.

[JohnThomas1]

Of course if they did fight they couldn't both loose.

Get into my thread devoted to this, your input will be appreciated.

[he grant]

In Sullivan's day John L. kills him. Today Wlad wins by boring decision.

Vitali would crush Wlad.

[janitor]

I can never understand why John L Sullivans face is not on the dollar bills.

[janitor]

While we are on tsubjet of Sullivan I found this interesting article.

It is hard to read but it describes Sullivans training regime in the run up to the Killrain fight. Sullivan trained with a 25 lb medicine ball, skipped rope and used dumbells. He also atatched a ball to a rope to use like a speed bag and hit it so hard that he broke the rope. It also details what Sullivan ate.

It also lists some tale of the tape measurments stating that Sullivan had a 42" chest and 16.5" biceps.


[Only registered and activated users can see links] [Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[janitor]

A couple of interesting points about the article.

It talks about "extreme measures" that Sullivan took to get down to 202 lbs compared to which his current training regime is apparently light releif. You have to wonder what fighters like Sullivan and Jeffries did to shed fat when they had been out of the ring.

The article mentions that Sullivans calves were not particularly developed but his thighs were huge. This would be an artefact of his training.

[Seamus]

the level of delusion this thread illustrate can not be overstated.

i began studying John L when I was 17 years old. I remember reading John L Sullivan's America for the first time. I was in awe of this 19th century Tyson figure.

However, I am bright enough and understand the relevance of observations made in the 1880's to those today to know that Sullivan would look a hell of a lot more like Joe Savage than Mike Tyson and last about a minute or two in the ring versus someone like Wlad.

[Boilermaker]

However, I am bright enough and understand the relevance of observations made in the 1880's to those today to know that Sullivan would look a hell of a lot more like Joe Savage than Mike Tyson and last about a minute or two in the ring versus someone like Wlad.

:lol::patsch

Yep, your pretty bright with that Comment.

Savage knocked them all out cold in 4 rounds regularly! Although he lost the only fight i saw him in. Even allowing for the skin colour, Mike still looks more like John L. I suppose if Savage grew the right moustache he may look a little like the old John L that is on film, but i still think John L looks a lot faster than savage in the clip that we have.

Incidentally, here is an interesting comparison about Tyson. He was in his prime the best finisher and ko puncher i have ever seen. And he always finished things as quickly as possible. If we forget about the high level opponents (and the amateur career, because he had a few losses there and was young and still learning), it is safe to say that his early opponents were not as good as the local veterans and fighters John L saw. Under the rules sullivan used, Tyson would have went through 1 year, 1985 having won all his fights in the 4 rounders and looking good to become another John L. In his second fight though, in 1986 Mike Jameson would have collected the money! Something that it took about 50 times more fights for someone to do to John L. In Tysons next fight, Jesse Ferguson would have taken the money. Before long, Tillis, Green and Jose Ribalta would have taken the money. admittedly these guys are starting to raise the quality of fighter (arguably) but either way, it demonstrates that it is very unlikely, that even a prime mike Tyson would have been able to do what John L Sullivan actually did. And this is without taking account of what past prime John L Sullivan did to Jake Kilrain, as opposed to what past prime Tyson did to Kevin McBride.

No matter which way you look at it, your comment is completely ridiculous.

[JohnThomas1]

:pop

[Seamus]

Guys who Sullivan thought were tough...

Fat ass Paddy Ryan, beer gutted...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

160 lb. John Donaldson who took him the distance...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

150 pound Charlie Mitchell who took him the distance and knocked him down...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Guys who Wlad flattened...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Yeah, I don't see a difference at all...

[janitor]

[quote=Seamus;5464723]Guys who Sullivan thought were tough...


I don't think that Sullivan thought that any of these guys were tough and I don't think that any of them posed a serious threat to him under queensbury rules.


Fat ass Paddy Ryan, beer gutted...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]


Paddy Ryain is definitely one of the weakest champions in history but lets consider that Sullivan had never fought under London Prize Ring rules when he met Ryan.

That would be like Wlad taking on an LPR champion tomorrow having only experienced queensbury bouts and beating him.

Either way the fight was a masacre.


160 lb. John Donaldson who took him the distance...


By the distance you mean four rounds.

Donaldson was small but he was elusive and mobile.

Is it untinkable that Bernard Hopkins could last four rounds against Wlad in a catchweight bout?


150 pound Charlie Mitchell who took him the distance and knocked him down...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]


You make a big issue of Charlie Mitchell lasting the distance but it is not easy to knock a man out if you have to put him down for 38 seconds and he can get a 38 second break every time he is in trouble just by going down.

Mitchell lasted three rounds against Sullivan in a Queensbury bout (would have been one round today) and lastedc three hours in a London Prize Ring bout. That should tell you something about the problems that Wlad might have faced under this rule set.


Guys who Wlad flattened...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Yeah, I don't see a difference at all...



This is boxing we are talking about not a body building contest.

[Boilermaker]

Guys who Sullivan thought were tough...

Fat ass Paddy Ryan, beer gutted...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

160 lb. John Donaldson who took him the distance...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

150 pound Charlie Mitchell who took him the distance and knocked him down...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Guys who Wlad flattened...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Yeah, I don't see a difference at all...


You got any pics of the first guys who went the four rounds with Wlad, I am thinking particularly of Big Carlos Monroe and Biko Botowamungu. Now those guys had a chin that would stand up to John L for 4 rounds, dont they.

Why not put up a picture of three guys that KOd a prime John L Sullivan to compare them with the 3 guys who kod Prime Wlad?

[am0kgonzo]

the level of delusion this thread illustrate can not be overstated.

i began studying John L when I was 17 years old. I remember reading John L Sullivan's America for the first time. I was in awe of this 19th century Tyson figure.

However, I am bright enough and understand the relevance of observations made in the 1880's to those today to know that Sullivan would look a hell of a lot more like Joe Savage than Mike Tyson and last about a minute or two in the ring versus someone like Wlad.


I'm gonna go with this. +1

[Unforgiven]

Guys who Sullivan thought were tough...

Fat ass Paddy Ryan, beer gutted...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

160 lb. John Donaldson who took him the distance...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

150 pound Charlie Mitchell who took him the distance and knocked him down...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Guys who Wlad flattened...

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Yeah, I don't see a difference at all...


Still obssessing over the physiques of boxers, eh, Seamus ?

These types of posts are hardly relevant to the specifics of the sport or analyses of fight-winning factors and more suited to admirers of the male form, wouldn't you say ?

It's not a bodybuilding contest after all, nor a exercise in homoerotic displays of an aethetic ideal, ....... you do know what I mean, dont you ?

:D

[Seamus]

Jameel McCline so titillates me.

Granted, I'm not a big fan of the eye-test. However, I personally know there is a huge damn difference going into the ring with guys willowy armed, 150 pounders and 230+ pounders who are strong as bulls. There's just a point where the suspension of disbelief regarding these 19th century fighters truly stretches the limits of the intellect.

Do you think that those of group A are as strong as Group B

[Seamus]

By the distance you mean four rounds.

Donaldson was small but he was elusive and mobile.

Is it untinkable that Bernard Hopkins could last four rounds against Wlad in a catchweight bout?



I mean 10 rounds.

[janitor]

I mean 10 rounds.

Donaldson was stopped in the ten rounder.

[janitor]

Do you think that those of group A are as strong as Group B

I dont think that group A represent the best or brightest of Sullivans opponents.

That aside I have already admited in this thread that Sullivan dominated one of the weakest, if not the weakest eras in heavyweight history.

[Seamus]

Donaldson was stopped in the ten rounder.

Yes, but what's with all these middleweights taking John L so many rounds?

[janitor]

Yes, but what's with all these middleweights taking John L so many rounds?

They generaly didn't.

Most of the slick technical types that Sullivan fought were tracked down and stopped prety quickly. For the Donaldson fight I could list a number of counter examples. Donaldson lasted as long as he did mainly because he went down repeatedly without being hit.

Somtimes Sullivan had to ease up on oponents to avoid the police intervening in the fight.

[Seamus]

For the record, and because it is so important for everyone to know, I hold Sullivan in very high esteem as a boxer. According to what I have read, which is quite a lot over the years, he was lightning quick, extremely powerful and nimble. Of course, these observations were made in the nascent era of gloved boxing and without the benefit of observers being able to see many fighters (i.e. no video). So, a grain of salt.

[janitor]

For the record, and because it is so important for everyone to know, I hold Sullivan in very high esteem as a boxer. According to what I have read, which is quite a lot over the years, he was lightning quick, extremely powerful and nimble. Of course, these observations were made in the nascent era of gloved boxing and without the benefit of observers being able to see many fighters (i.e. no video). So, a grain of salt.

So what do you think about the observations of Joe Choynski who clearly had seen and fought a lot of fighters?

Do you think that Sullivan would have done well in Jeffries era or Jack Johnsons era if he was inserted in their place?

[Legend X]

John L Sullivan would attack ferociously at the start of the contest and I doubt Klitschko could survive past 4 rounds.
Sullivan wins by KO or TKO.

[Boilermaker]

This is actually a very interesting matchup.

On my counts, Vlad currently has an 11-4 lead, on my count.

But, 9 people contributed to the thread but either did not make a prediction, or made a prediction for both fighters, depending on the rule set. Of the 11 that selected Vlad, at least half appeared to use the primitive argument. I would guess also that about half dont really know anything about John L and think that he was a primitive swinger who was not as good as hundreds of mythical black fighters that were held back. Interestingly, i have not seen many of those who voted for Vlad ever contribute to the classic forum (not necessarilly a bad thing).

Anyway, the fight is in the balance as if the undecideds were to side with John L, he would cause the upset. In order to make things fair, i think the rules need to be clarified15 rounds is not enough, i think that Wyatt Earp or someone of similar ilk needs to be firmly established as the referee, so that Vlad cannot just jab and grab without repercussions.

[Del Boy]

Wlad by KO 6. Stays behind the jab and frustrates John L beyond belief before lowering the right. Sullivan threw one punch at a time which Klitschko could easily avoid. Also to note Sullivan was KO'd by a cruiserweight corbett and would not be able to take the punching of a 245 Klitschko.

[janitor]

[quote=Del Boy;5523022]Wlad by KO 6. Stays behind the jab and frustrates John L beyond belief before lowering the right. Sullivan threw one punch at a time which Klitschko could easily avoid.

Sullivan did not throw one punch at a time and he had blinding handspeed.

I dont think Wlad is going to have an easy time evading his punches.

Also to note Sullivan was KO'd by a cruiserweight corbett and would not be able to take the punching of a 245 Klitschko.

There has to come a point somwhere where you make an alowance for a fighter being past his prime.

[KTFO]

Klitschko KO2 Sullivan

Klitschko with superior footwork, jab and combos. Sullivan's old-old school way of boxing would be his death. Especially against a fighter like Klitscko who combines height, power and technique.

[janitor]

[quote=KTFO;5529035]Klitschko KO2 Sullivan

Klitschko with superior footwork, jab and combos.


What makes you think that Klitschko has superior footwork, jab and combos?

It is hard to know in each case but I would bet money that Sullivan had better footwork.


Sullivan's old-old school way of boxing would be his death. Especially against a fighter like Klitscko who combines height, power and technique.


What do you think was "old School" about Sullivan's style?

He probably had the one style that hasn't changed significantly over the past 100 years.

[ChrisPontius]

Wlad may well have the best footwork of all superheavyweights we've ever seen. His balance is top notch (Steward noticed this before he trained him) and no opponent ever consistently managed to get in punching range.

Sullivan's footwork was based on an entirely different SPORT. It was grappling + bareknuckle/smallgloved boxing. Different thing. I'm sure the Judo champ has great footwork for his throws, but put him in a boxing ring and see how great it looks.


Janitor, you still seem (knowingly?) ignorant towards the fact that boxing was COMPLETELY different back then. Hands low, lesser combination punching, no glove blocking, throwing allowed, ends rounds, longer rounds. All of these things have a huge impact on what works and what doesn't, and if you think that Sullivan fights like Patterson then you are making a big mistake.

Wlad by TKO in what isn't a fair fight because one fights under his own rules while the other doesn't.

[janitor]

[quote=ChrisPontius;5529327]Wlad may well have the best footwork of all superheavyweights we've ever seen. His balance is top notch (Steward noticed this before he trained him) and no opponent ever consistently managed to get in punching range.

Sullivan's footwork was based on an entirely different SPORT. It was grappling + bareknuckle/smallgloved boxing. Different thing. I'm sure the Judo champ has great footwork for his throws, but put him in a boxing ring and see how great it looks.


If you read contemporary acounts it quickly becomes apparent that Sullivan was like a cat on his feet.

He used to jump up in the air to fire a punch over his oponent guard or leap several feet back to avoid a punch.


Janitor, you still seem (knowingly?) ignorant towards the fact that boxing was COMPLETELY different back then. Hands low, lesser combination punching, no glove blocking, throwing allowed, ends rounds, longer rounds. All of these things have a huge impact on what works and what doesn't, and if you think that Sullivan fights like Patterson then you are making a big mistake.

Wlad by TKO in what isn't a fair fight because one fights under his own rules while the other doesn't.


Would you ever consider that Sullivan might have fought in a zone between bareknuckle fighting and early Queensbury fighting where the rules were not unlike todays?

Sullivan was a lot closer to modern rules than Jeffries was.

In fact if title fights were reduced to eight rounds then Sullivan might just be better suited to them than Wlad.

[JohnThomas1]

If you read contemporary accounts it quickly becomes apparent that Sullivan was like a cat on his feet.

He used to jump up in the air to fire a punch over his opponents guard or leap several feet back to avoid a punch.
:lol:

[Boilermaker]

Wlad may well have the best footwork of all superheavyweights we've ever seen. His balance is top notch (Steward noticed this before he trained him) and no opponent ever consistently managed to get in punching range.


Vlad used to have the worst footwork i have ever seen, early in his career, but from memory, it has improved quite a bit recently. I will need to relook at his recent fights again, but there is no way his balance and footwork is better than say Lennox Lewis'. I thought Sanders, Brewster, and Peters landed consistently, without even thinking about it. Vlad is a good fighter and improving with every fight, but he is not this unbeatable monster that people assume. If you look at his reign, he has beaten a few good fighters, with Chris Byrd definitely being the best win, although history has shown that he had aged by the time that Vlad beat him. The first win hardly counts since the Vlad that beat him was not recognisable to the one that became a good fighter.


Sullivan's footwork was based on an entirely different SPORT. It was grappling + bareknuckle/smallgloved boxing. Different thing. I'm sure the Judo champ has great footwork for his throws, but put him in a boxing ring and see how great it looks.


But it is a 15 round fight. why wouldnt the fighters be using small gloves and and grappling? Surely you dont want to give Wlad all the advantages. Wlad is largely an unknown against John Ls style of fighting. I dont think it looks that promising for him. His size might help him a bit in the clinches and grapples, but his poor chin is going to be a big problem if John L hits him in the break isnt it? Out of a time machine Wlad isnt really trained to deal with a lot of John Ls offence. As you said, it is an entirely different sport and Wlad is only skilled in half the game.


Janitor, you still seem (knowingly?) ignorant towards the fact that boxing was COMPLETELY different back then. Hands low, lesser combination punching, no glove blocking, throwing allowed, ends rounds, longer rounds. All of these things have a huge impact on what works and what doesn't, and if you think that Sullivan fights like Patterson then you are making a big mistake.

Hands low (but not as low as say, a Vitali Klitchsko) and i think Sullivan had high hands, didnt he?
Lesser combination punching. I dont think this is correct. It is only lesser in the extent that if you throw combinations, the fight would become a grapple more often (like a Ruiz fight, where combinations are not that common). Wlad will not be able to fire too many combinations if he is stuck in a long grapple with John L (not that i necessarilly think this will happen). No Glove blocking - Limited, but this is offset by an increase in parrying. How is Wlad going to defend without his glove blocking? It certainly places him at a massive disadvantage with the wrong gloves.

Wlad by TKO in what isn't a fair fight because one fights under his own rules while the other doesn't.

This statement makes no sense. If Wlad fights under his own rules and Sullivan under his, then by definition, Wlad is the one under the unfair disadvantage, because he wont have seen or be skilled at half the techniques. It would be like a boxer fighting a kick boxer. The kick boxer rules allow everything a boxer does and then some. The boxer would obviously be at a disadvantage and the same would be if these two fight. Many of Sullivans tactics are not allowed today. All of Wlads were allowed in Sullivans day. If we have a fight then obviously Sullivan must be allowed to fight to his own rules (save for LPR Kd round end rule and bareknuckles which wasnt really part of Sullivans rules anyway).

[ChrisPontius]

Vlad used to have the worst footwork i have ever seen, early in his career, but from memory, it has improved quite a bit recently. I will need to relook at his recent fights again, but there is no way his balance and footwork is better than say Lennox Lewis'. I thought Sanders, Brewster, and Peters landed consistently, without even thinking about it. Vlad is a good fighter and improving with every fight, but he is not this unbeatable monster that people assume. If you look at his reign, he has beaten a few good fighters, with Chris Byrd definitely being the best win, although history has shown that he had aged by the time that Vlad beat him. The first win hardly counts since the Vlad that beat him was not recognisable to the one that became a good fighter.


Watch it again. Sanders had that unorthodox, fast and powerful left that he landed and that was basically it. Brewster barely landed a shot on Wlad; he tired himself out. Peter landing consistently?:lol: Given that you make this huge mistake in judgment, i'm not sure how serious i should take your opinion on this.


But it is a 15 round fight. why wouldnt the fighters be using small gloves and and grappling? Surely you dont want to give Wlad all the advantages. Wlad is largely an unknown against John Ls style of fighting. I dont think it looks that promising for him. His size might help him a bit in the clinches and grapples, but his poor chin is going to be a big problem if John L hits him in the break isnt it? Out of a time machine Wlad isnt really trained to deal with a lot of John Ls offence. As you said, it is an entirely different sport and Wlad is only skilled in half the game.


How good is Sullivan's chin? How important is one's chin if you have a full minute to recover and can go whenever you want? How many 200+lbs talented heavies did he beat? How many 200+lbs men did he beat at all? Pugs from saloons? How many talented men did he fight at all? Talent pool in his day was tiny, as were means of transport and communication (no ratings, etc). Don't think he's as proven as Wlad when you make a cross-era comparison.


Hands low (but not as low as say, a Vitali Klitchsko) and i think Sullivan had high hands, didnt he?


No, he didn't. You're seeing things that are contrary to every single bit of photographed evidence, which is not open to opinions of any time.


Lesser combination punching. I dont think this is correct. It is only lesser in the extent that if you throw combinations, the fight would become a grapple more often (like a Ruiz fight, where combinations are not that common). Wlad will not be able to fire too many combinations if he is stuck in a long grapple with John L (not that i necessarilly think this will happen). No Glove blocking - Limited, but this is offset by an increase in parrying. How is Wlad going to defend without his glove blocking? It certainly places him at a massive disadvantage with the wrong gloves.


How is it relevant how Wlad is going to defend without his glove blocking? The rules of this tournament is 15 rounds, modern (post 40's) rules. Not 1800's rules.


This statement makes no sense. If Wlad fights under his own rules and Sullivan under his, then by definition, Wlad is the one under the unfair disadvantage, because he wont have seen or be skilled at half the techniques. It would be like a boxer fighting a kick boxer. The kick boxer rules allow everything a boxer does and then some. The boxer would obviously be at a disadvantage and the same would be if these two fight. Many of Sullivans tactics are not allowed today. All of Wlads were allowed in Sullivans day. If we have a fight then obviously Sullivan must be allowed to fight to his own rules (save for LPR Kd round end rule and bareknuckles which wasnt really part of Sullivans rules anyway).

You misread my statement. I said:
Wlad vs Sullivan here is unfair because Wlad fights under his own rules and Sullivan doesn't.

[Boilermaker]

Watch it again. Sanders had that unorthodox, fast and powerful left that he landed and that was basically it. Brewster barely landed a shot on Wlad; he tired himself out. Peter landing consistently?:lol: Given that you make this huge mistake in judgment, i'm not sure how serious i should take your opinion on this.

I will rewatch when i get time., that comment was made basically by the fact that these guys all knocked Vlad down and therefore, they all must have got threw with at least one shot! By the way, if these guys can all knock down Wlad, without landing consistently, wouldnt you think that Sullivan could do. If Wlad tires when he lands consistently against Brewster, is it not likely that he is in trouble if Sullivan is as tough as his fights indicate. And is an unorthodox and Fast and powerful left is causing problems, well wouldnt that indicate taht he might be troubled by Sullivan whose punches you tend to suggest will be fast powerful and unorhodox!



How good is Sullivan's chin? How important is one's chin if you have a full minute to recover and can go whenever you want? How many 200+lbs talented heavies did he beat? How many 200+lbs men did he beat at all? Pugs from saloons? How many talented men did he fight at all? Talent pool in his day was tiny, as were means of transport and communication (no ratings, etc). Don't think he's as proven as Wlad when you make a cross-era comparison.

Like today, most seem to think it wasn t the best talent pool. But, he didnt duck the clear standout number 1 challenger for his entire reign (Vitali), and he didnt have sanctioning bodies (largely) ruling out top contenders either. In sullivans time, it was travel that kept many top contenders appart (or lack of media reporting) but in Wlads, it is just the attitudes and "good management". To be honest, if Wlad was to travel around like Sullivan did (assuming he was successful) I think it would improve his legacy massively. Somewhere along the line, he would have fought guys like Ruiz, Valuev, Tua etc as well as the current guys he has already fought.


No, he didn't. You're seeing things that are contrary to every single bit of photographed evidence, which is not open to opinions of any time.

what photos are there where his left hand is held lower than Vitali's? Even those ones of the bareknuckle fight have the hands higher than Vitali has them, and that looks to me to be taken clearly after exhaustion has set in and hands naturally tend to drop.


How is it relevant how Wlad is going to defend without his glove blocking? The rules of this tournament is 15 rounds, modern (post 40's) rules. Not 1800's rules.


Round 3 action. Wladimir Klitschko victorious over Gerry Cooney & Jefferies will be facing his strongest compeition in John L. Sullivan. Who has advanced thus far by defeating, Morrison & Jack Sharkey. Tough match up.

Please give reasoning for prediction. Please give predicted result.

Round 3. 15 Rounds.

15 Rounds is agreed, Queensbury rules is agreed.

But where is it agreed that rules are modern? I suppose you want neutral corners also.

You cant ban the same things that modern referees ban, just because your favourite hasnt been subjected to them. A fighter needs to apply his full arsenal. It would be like pitting Muhammed Ali against the champion 100 years from now under 15 round queensbury rules when future referees had decided that head shots were too brutal and needed to be banned.

Sullivan can use whatever gloves Queensbury rules allow and whatever tactics Queensbury rules allow.

You misread my statement. I said:
Wlad vs Sullivan here is unfair because Wlad fights under his own rules and Sullivan doesn't.

But the problem is that you are assuming that the rules of this fight are solely Wlads and that is back to front. Put Simply Wlad throws a punch and clinches. Sullivan repeatedly strikes in the clinch. This is legal. Sullivan doesnt break the clinch and allow Wlad to reestablish distance, because he doesnt have to and the referee is not entitled to force him to. If the rules are silence, then it must be assumed that both fighters are allowed to use the tactics they used in their time. Wlad is at a big disadvantage because he has never seen some of Sullivans tactics as TV stations or other factors outlawed those tactics. It doesnt mean that the modern fighter automatically loses, but he has a massive hurdle to overcome.

[cross_trainer]

Steward employs a bunch of guys to record Sullivan's sparring on iphones. Sullivan's trainers, being 19th century guys, don't understand the problem. Steward finds a weakness, teaches Klitschko to exploit it, and Wlad beats Sullivan by KO.

[cross_trainer]

Also...

1) Like it or not, Sullivan's talent pool WAS smaller than Wlad's, and by a significant margin

2) Sullivan was primarily a gloved heavyweight, so his style isn't quite as far from Wlad's as some argue.

3) That being said, the style was still different, albeit unorthodox. Wlad would have some trouble with him.

4) I doubt he was leaping several feet in the air like a ballet dancer. More like a short, fencing-style hop.

5) I do not think that Sullivan fought like Patterson. Rather, he was just more hunched over than traditional LPR fighters.

6) If we're using modern gloves, bear in mind that Sullivan's chin was (relatively) tested against tiny, 4-6 oz. gloves. Perhaps Mitchell could score knockdowns against modern cruiserweights with those gloves (Mormeck or Pavlik moreso than Haye, size-wise...)

7) Wlad wins unless Sullivan gets in a lucky punch.

8 ) Unfortunately, pre-Steward Wlad (if we're not talking prime-for-prime) sometimes had trouble against opponents he hadn't prepped for. Sullivan fits the bill here.

9) Wlad still probably wins.

10) Golota's crazy

[DudeGuyMan]

[quote] He used to jump up in the air to fire a punch over his oponent guard or leap several feet back to avoid a punch.

Ridiculous tactics that would get him murdered in a modern ring against any modestly skilled opponent. Anyone who can seriously suggest that Sullivan is going to step in against a skilled and experienced 6'7" modern heavyweight champ and smite him with his leaping punches just like he would some fucking fisherman with no verifiable record, or some 19th century 'heavyweight' the size of Bernard Hopkins, needs their head examined.

As a parallel, look at UFC. The guys who were doing that stuff 15 years ago? (When it was just beginning to transition from barely-legal bareknuckle fighting to a legitimate gloved sport, sound familiar?) Make them all 15 years younger again and throw them in with the dudes doing MMA today and the old guard will mostly get killed. Sports evolve, tactics evolve, and the talent pool gets larger.

[Legend X]

Like it or not, Sullivan's talent pool WAS smaller than Wlad's, and by a significant margin


How have you measured that ?

[mcvey]

I will rewatch when i get time., that comment was made basically by the fact that these guys all knocked Vlad down and therefore, they all must have got threw with at least one shot! By the way, if these guys can all knock down Wlad, without landing consistently, wouldnt you think that Sullivan could do. If Wlad tires when he lands consistently against Brewster, is it not likely that he is in trouble if Sullivan is as tough as his fights indicate. And is an unorthodox and Fast and powerful left is causing problems, well wouldnt that indicate taht he might be troubled by Sullivan whose punches you tend to suggest will be fast powerful and unorhodox!



Like today, most seem to think it wasn t the best talent pool. But,didnt duck the clear standout number 1 challenger for his he entire reign (Vitali), and he didnt have sanctioning bodies (largely) ruling out top contenders either. In sullivans time, it was travel that kept many top contenders appart (or lack of media reporting) but in Wlads, it is just the attitudes and "good management". To be honest, if Wlad was to travel around like Sullivan did (assuming he was successful) I think it would improve his legacy massively. Somewhere along the line, he would have fought guys like Ruiz, Valuev, Tua etc as well as the current guys he has already fought.


what photos are there where his left hand is held lower than Vitali's? Even those ones of the bareknuckle fight have the hands higher than Vitali has them, and that looks to me to be taken clearly after exhaustion has set in and hands naturally tend to drop.


Round 3 action. Wladimir Klitschko victorious over Gerry Cooney & Jefferies will be facing his strongest compeition in John L. Sullivan. Who has advanced thus far by defeating, Morrison & Jack Sharkey. Tough match up.

Please give reasoning for prediction. Please give predicted result.

Round 3. 15 Rounds.

15 Rounds is agreed, Queensbury rules is agreed.

But where is it agreed that rules are modern? I suppose you want neutral corners also.

You cant ban the same things that modern referees ban, just because your favourite hasnt been subjected to them. A fighter needs to apply his full arsenal. It would be like pitting Muhammed Ali against the champion 100 years from now under 15 round queensbury rules when future referees had decided that head shots were too brutal and needed to be banned.

Sullivan can use whatever gloves Queensbury rules allow and whatever tactics Queensbury rules allow.


But the problem is that you are assuming that the rules of this fight are solely Wlads and that is back to front. Put Simply Wlad throws a punch and clinches. Sullivan repeatedly strikes in the clinch. This is legal. Sullivan doesnt break the clinch and allow Wlad to reestablish distance, because he doesnt have to and the referee is not entitled to force him to. If the rules are silence, then it must be assumed that both fighters are allowed to use the tactics they used in their time. Wlad is at a big disadvantage because he has never seen some of Sullivans tactics as TV stations or other factors outlawed those tactics. It doesnt mean that the modern fighter automatically loses, but he has a massive hurdle to overcome.

Sullivan refused to fight his most dangerous and outstanding challenger,Peter Jackson,not for his entire reign but for a part of it.

[Mendoza]

Sullivan refused to fight his most dangerous and outstanding challenger,Peter Jackson,not for his entire reign but for a part of it.

He also wanted no part of Slavin, who was nearly as good as Jackson was. When Sullivan refused to meet Slavin, Richard K. Fox who was in charge of the Police gazette awarded the belt to Slavin. IMO, Slavin would have been the best win for Sullivan if they meet and John L won.

Sullivan resume lacks a Jackson, Slavin, Goddard, and Dooley on it, and three of those guys were not bound by any color line.

[mcvey]

He also wanted no part of Slavin, who was nearly as good as Jackson was. When Sullivan refused to meet Slavin, Richard K. Fox who was in charge of the Police gazette awarded the belt to Slavin. IMO, Slavin would have been the best win for Sullivan if they meet and John L won.

Sullivan resume lacks a Jackson, Slavin, Goddard, and Dooley on it, and three of those guys were not bound by any color line.

Sullivan's supporters had a special belt commissioned ,encrusted with diamonds.
A grateful John L said , " this belt makes Fox's look like a dog collar".

The feud between Sullivan and Fox supposedly started in a restaurant when Fox ,spotting Sullivan ,sent some one over to invite him to his table,the prickly Sullivan took it as a summons, and said "if he wants to talk to me ,he can come over here to my table",

I think Slavin would have been beaten by even a slighly past it Sullivan ,he did not have the science of Jackson.
I beleive Sullivan's best win was his comeback from physical collapse to beat Jake Kilrain,a tribute to his indominability and to William Muldoon's training.

[Boilermaker]

Sullivan refused to fight his most dangerous and outstanding challenger,Peter Jackson,not for his entire reign but for a part of it.

I think we all agree that Sullivan was long past it by this time.

A far different scenario to Vlad - Vitali. NOt to mention Vlad-Lewis where it was defeats that stopped Wlad from meeting him. (same with Wlad - Tyson or to a lesser extent Wlad- HOllyfield). To be honest, John Ruiz, Nicolai Valuev are two bigger names and common World champions who Wlad has avoided in his reign whose claims at certain times were pretty much as good as Jackson's were. Still, with his win over Chageav and some of the younger but unproven contenders he has beat recently, i think he is starting to come into his own. I think he has nearly cleaned the division (Vitali aside). Which to me, means he is close to building an all time legacy, but i still think his chin needs testing to compete with the likes of Sullivan. It is possible that this may not happen until he is past prime. But, he has not shown any ability to take clean shots at this stage. It is all very well to say that he does not have to, but when you fight prime ATG fighters, they always find a way to land at least a few shots, and this is where Wlad sufferes most head to head.

Back to Jackson, he is one of my favourites, but i dont think he was the standout you suggest. First of all, he had the draw with Corbett. Corbett himself was one of a few challengers and Jackson could not beat him. This would not really make him the stand out challenger. Before the Corbett fight, in 1890, Jackson had drawn with Goddard, in a fight where both were knocked down and what seemed to be a fair decision. He does have some wins over Peter Maher, Denver Ed Smith and Tom Lees which clearly would have put him in the picture, but he was not the standout challenger that many people think. I would see he is one of a handful with a decent claim to an old sullivans title.

I am not sure about the other two that Mendoza mentioned and will have to look into it. Either way, i dont see how they were standout challengers just one of a group of hopeful challengers waiting for their chance against an aged champion who was no longer actively fighting often.

[janitor]

[quote=Mendoza;5547424]He also wanted no part of Slavin, who was nearly as good as Jackson was.

Not true.

Sullivan was much more interested in meeting Slavin than he was in fighting Jackson or Corbett. The main reason that Corbett got to fight Sullivan instead of Slavin was that his backers were able to put up the required advance.

You also have to take into acount that Sullivan did fight Corbett who he would have to have asumed to be as dangerous as Jackson and more dangerous than Slavin. Sullivan bet his entire purse on himself so he clearly didn't expect to loose.

[Mendoza]

Sullivan's supporters had a special belt commissioned ,encrusted with diamonds.
A grateful John L said , " this belt makes Fox's look like a dog collar".

The feud between Sullivan and Fox supposedly started in a restaurant when Fox ,spotting Sullivan ,sent some one over to invite him to his table,the prickly Sullivan took it as a summons, and said "if he wants to talk to me ,he can come over here to my table",

I think Slavin would have been beaten by even a slighly past it Sullivan ,he did not have the science of Jackson.
I beleive Sullivan's best win was his comeback from physical collapse to beat Jake Kilrain,a tribute to his indominability and to William Muldoon's training.

I think you might under rate Slavin. Before Jackson ruined him, he was refereed to as an early version of Jack Dempsey. A powerful hitter with speed and size.

I agree Kilrain is Sullivan's best win. However Slavin KO'd a then 29-1 with 9 draws Kilrain in nine rounds.

I think a Slavin vs Sullivan fight in 1886 or 1887 could have gone either way. If Sullivan was slightly past it by then, or not in great shape, Slavin power might get to him.

[ChrisPontius]

How have you measured that ?

The American population (Sullivan fought only in America, traveling wasn't easy back then) was about 50 million at that time. The current world population is about 7 billion. That 140 times more people. Plus, back in Sullivan's day, how many went to the boxing gym? Were there monthly rankings? Delivered by diligence, if not robbed? :lol: Most of his opponents were local saloon "tough" guys. In today's words: tomato cans.

[mcvey]

The American population (Sullivan fought only in America, traveling wasn't easy back then) was about 50 million at that time. The current world population is about 7 billion. That 140 times more people. Plus, back in Sullivan's day, how many went to the boxing gym? Were there monthly rankings? Delivered by diligence, if not robbed? :lol: Most of his opponents were local saloon "tough" guys. In today's words: tomato cans.

Chris,Sullivan did have at least 2 fights outside the states . He fought Bill Samuels in Cardiff Wales ,stopping him in the 3rd rd.
He also battled to a 39 rd draw in the mud , against Charley Mitchell on Baron Rothschild's estate at Chantilly , France, these were under LPR rules.Your point is well taken however Sullivan was essentially a big fish in a little pond, not his fault really apart from avoiding Jackson ,at the tail end of his career he met whoever was available, imo.

[mcvey]

I think you might under rate Slavin. Before Jackson ruined him, he was refereed to as an early version of Jack Dempsey. A powerful hitter with speed and size.

I agree Kilrain is Sullivan's best win. However Slavin KO'd a then 29-1 with 9 draws Kilrain in nine rounds.

I think a Slavin vs Sullivan fight in 1886 or 1887 could have gone either way. If Sullivan was slightly past it by then, or not in great shape, Slavin power might get to him.

Slavin was allready showing signs of becoming an alcoholic ,before he met Jackson.

[Boilermaker]

This fight has been going on for ages. So long so, that i think that it can be safely assumed that the 15 round distance has gone on out the window and it has become a fight to the finish. I guess that make all those early ko picks either way invalid.

So, now that it has ended up 15 rounds and it seems that both fighters must agree to extend to a fight to the finish, how do the others see the fight finishing. Can Klitchsko continue to pummel sullivan into the ground and win, or does Sullivan eventually wear him down and start to catch klitchsko? Does Klitchsko maintain power after 15 or does exhaustion step in?

[spittle8]

That is always the bottom line.

Reconstructing Sullivan is a bit like reconstructing a Dinosaur from its skeleton.

I have looked at the Dinosaur skeleton and deduced that it bellonged to a T rex but that still leaves a lot of room for interpretation.
:lol: Indeed, but in Jurassic Park they clocked a T-Rex at "32MPH" whereas scientists now claim a top speed of 18MPH. Shit, I can almost run that fast! Ichiro runs that fast! It's tough to say.

The best I can do is say that with modern training but the same wicked environment, I'd expect John L. to be as scary as they get. Time machined together I would expect him to be killed by the jab. In his defense, of all the heavyweight champs, he's probably the last one I would want to get into a street fight with.

No man living or dead could have beaten a prime John L.

I dont even rate Sullivan in my top 20 heavyweights of all-time, really because it would be unfair to mix him in with mere mortals. It's a worthless comparison.
John L. was NOT a great fighter like those others, he was just ferocious. It would be like ranking a Bengal Tiger against men.
Outside of the ring, John L. might have been a man, a great man. But inside the ring he was something otherworldly, a demon perhaps, an animal surely.
I want people to understand this.

His style was impetuous, if you could even call it a "style". And his defense was impregnable, but to call it a "defense" makes it sound too mortal, too refined, feminine even. There aren't really words to describe him, he was the one and only great John L., and, for want of a better expression, he was just ferocious.

The era he fought in was full of men hardened through hardship and chaos, and the men he fought were the roughest and toughest, and demi-gods and diablos in their own right.
And John L. was the most godly and the most diabolical of all beings, he stood alone in that time.
So imagine what he'd do against a mere mortal and vulnerable fighter of this era, like Wlad Klitschko.

As the great Reg Gutteridge once said, "It was about as one-sided as a lynching", and Sullivan preying on Wlad Klitschko would, quite literally, be as bad as a lynching.

I would campaign against the fight being made, and pray for Wladimir Klitschko, and pray for Sullivan's dark soul too. This mismatch would destroy any justification for the continuation of boxing.

Sullivan KO1 Klitschko.
:roflPOST OF THE FUCKING YEAR! That was awesome, dude.