Question about John L sullivan and Peter Jackson

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 22 Dec 2005, 00:04

Right now Im analysizing all the heavyweights before i come out with my official top 50 heavyweight list......

but i have a question regarding the corbett era.

my question is did john L duck peter jackson based purely on refusing to fight a negro man??? and in your opinion, would peter jackson have whipped john L???

also i have read different reports on jackson-corbett fight, but it seems like jackson who was 30 and many thought had already declined, got the better of corbett. is this the case?

and finally

who do u think wins between corbett vs prime sullivan?

DoubleM · Post by **DoubleM** » 22 Dec 2005, 00:16

Corbett would always beat Sullivan. I doubt he would knock him out - in their actual fight, Sullivan was in terrible shape and the knockout came a lot from exhaustion. Corbett was really the first modern fighter, however, and Sullivan's somewhat primitive fighting style would not work well for him. Sullivan's wild, straight punches were easy for Corbett to avoid.

I would say there was a degree of fear in Sullivan's heart when regarding Jackson. I do believe he was actually racist enough to not fight Jackson because he was black, but the reasoning was just very convinient since Sullivan knew Jackson had a good chance of beating him. Sullivan was the king, you see, and he didn't want to be knocked off his throne. He was a proud man.

iceman21287 · Post by **iceman21287** » 22 Dec 2005, 05:32

I've always considered The Black Prince to be the greatest fighter of his era - including Sullivan and Corbett.

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 22 Dec 2005, 08:22

DoubleM wrote:Corbett would always beat Sullivan. I doubt he would knock him out - in their actual fight, Sullivan was in terrible shape and the knockout came a lot from exhaustion. Corbett was really the first modern fighter, however, and Sullivan's somewhat primitive fighting style would not work well for him. Sullivan's wild, straight punches were easy for Corbett to avoid.

I would say there was a degree of fear in Sullivan's heart when regarding Jackson. I do believe he was actually racist enough to not fight Jackson because he was black, but the reasoning was just very convinient since Sullivan knew Jackson had a good chance of beating him. Sullivan was the king, you see, and he didn't want to be knocked off his throne. He was a proud man.

Wow.

What have you based all this on?

Do you know why Sullivan even chose Corbett?

Do you even know what Sullivan did shortly before he fought Corbett in regard to his fighting condition?

And you obviously don’t even know what Sullivan’s pet punch was by your description of his wild straight -punches description.

John L. was a very, very proud American, and this made him chose to fight Corbett more than any other of his challengers, he wanted the title to stay in America, and Corbett was the one who came up with the money first out of the other challengers.

Corbett had sparred/exhibition Sullivan a couple of times before and Sullivan thought it a winnable fight, but then again John L. thought he could really beat any man …because he was the great John L.

And to say there was fear in Sullivan’s heart at the thought of fighting Jackson is just rubbish, Corbett had fought Jackson anyway.

Peter Jackson could very well have been the best man at that time, but you cannot over look Corbett because didn’t they draw.

But boxing was going through a change in styles at the time, the prize fighting style of John L. was being changed in favour of the style we would recognise more today.

John L. was old and had seen better days but in John L. Sullivan’s eyes he could still lick any man in the world, and whilst some questioned Sullivan’s condition he got a doctor to examine him and record his good fighting condition…and its there in his book he wrote before the Corbett fight to read.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 22 Dec 2005, 09:30

Well put tony. John L feared no man, and was a notrious racist. During that period in history, in general, most Irish-Americans were not particularly fond of African-Americans. Of course, this is terribly unfortunate, because a good argument can be made that Jackson was the best gloved HW fighter of the late 1880's. And as you noted, you needed the $$ to get into the ring with the Great John L. He was pretty good at squeezing money out of his fame, and was not just a great fighter but also a great showman. He quickly became the first US sports idol, as much for his personailty as his not insignificant fighting ability.

As far as his match against Corbett, if John L had been in terrible shape there's no way he could have lasted 21 rounds. From the accounts I have read, John L even attempted pressing the fight in a few of the later rounds, before becoming totally spent. However, I do agree that he was well past his prime in this fight, and I tend to think that had they met in their primes, he would have a had a pretty good chance of beating JJC.

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 22 Dec 2005, 11:35

John L. done more theatre than fighting during his reign.

Look at the photo`s of John L. at the early stage of his career, not the bloated ones of him mid-late.

Corbett may well have posed big problems because Sullivan didn`t like runners..Charley Mitchell showed that...and Mitchel was quite smaller also.

But if anybody stood prizefighting macho style infront of John L. he would ignore whatever they may hit him with and smash that right-hand into the side of their neck as soon as he could.

But if they ran :(

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 22 Dec 2005, 11:52

tonyevs wrote:John L. done more theatre than fighting during his reign.

Look at the photo`s of John L. at the early stage of his career, not the bloated ones of him mid-late.

Corbett may well have posed big problems because Sullivan didn`t like runners..Charley Mitchell showed that...and Mitchel was quite smaller also.

But if anybody stood prizefighting macho style infront of John L. he would ignore whatever they may hit him with and smash that right-hand into the side of their neck as soon as he could.

But if they ran :(

Yes, you are correct about the physical decline of John L during his reign, although he could get in shape when necessary. As far as the "runner" giving him trouble, the Mitchell fight you refer to was a barknuckle fight where he did give John L fits. However, years earlier JLS KO'd Mitchell in 3 rounds in a gloved match. One of the reasons John L preferred gloved fights is that it made for a more engaging fight, where his quickness could give him an ever better advantage.

John L was far from the limited brawler that most now consider him. He was quick fisted and had excellent reflexes. While he was not the the ring technician of Corbett or Jackson, he had decent skills and great natural physical gifts.

barry · Post by **barry** » 22 Dec 2005, 13:12

Sullivan a caveman...based on what?

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 22 Dec 2005, 16:04

barry wrote:Sullivan a caveman...based on what?

Ignorance

The knock-down that Mitchel got credited for was dismissed by Sullivan as nothing but a slip, he wagered Mitchel in the papers that he would keep his hands by his side and Mitchel could give him his best shot and that would not be enough to floor the great John L.....as far as I know Mitchel didn`t offer to take him up on it.

Corbett offered to fight bare-knuckle with Sullivan but as said, John L. preffered the gloves, because he figured there would be less time wasting with phantom knock-downs, and less trouble with the police.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 22 Dec 2005, 16:08

didnt sullivan knock down corbett in the 17th round?

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 23 Dec 2005, 08:21

The 17th from what I have read is when Corbett stamped his authority and came forward...putting real weight into his punches and staggering Sullivan.

The 4th was the only round Sullivan landed anything like a punch...and that was only a glancing shot that Corbett barely registered.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 23 Dec 2005, 08:53

tonyevs wrote:The 17th from what I have read is when Corbett stamped his authority and came forward...putting real weight into his punches and staggering Sullivan.

The 4th was the only round Sullivan landed anything like a punch...and that was only a glancing shot that Corbett barely registered.

Not sure where you are getting this, but the newspaper recaps I have read gave credit to Sullivan for landing punches in most of the rounds. Most were not solid, but this myth that he landed only a single glancing blow over 21 rounds should be too much like a fairy tale for anyone to beleive, yet it appears many times, including a book by Bert Sugar from the 70's that reads like nothing more Hollywood fantasy. In fact, it is very possible that Sugar and many others are simply recalling the Sullivan-Corbett "fight" as shown in the Hollywood film Gentleman Jim.

Sullivan was also staggered several times before the 17th round, and I beleive that his last real attempt to mount a serious assault in the fight was the 14th round. Of course, it's been about 4 months since I had to find one of the recaps and read it to refute this "single glancing blow" myth.

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 23 Dec 2005, 10:34

Nobody can say without any measure of doubt what really happened in the fight, because we are all going on the written accounts...and even today who can really believe that

The books that I lean towards are by Chidsey and Dibble.

Sullivan was still seen as unbeatable by most even towards the end, the myth was so great, I`m sure Sullivan did land more than one glancing blow over the length of the fight but Corbett back-peddaled enough for the crowd to chant `dancing master` and this was not any kind of praise

barry · Post by **barry** » 23 Dec 2005, 11:34

"John L. Sullivan and His America" by Michael T. Isenberg is the best, most thouroughly researched book on Sullivan that I have ever seen...actually it's one of the most thoroughly researched books on anything that I have seen, very, very detailed. I don't recall what Isenberg says about the bout, but I would say that he has certainly read most every account of the fight that was written.

pound per pound · Post by **pound per pound** » 23 Dec 2005, 15:12

iceman21287 wrote:I've always considered The Black Prince to be the greatest fighter of his era - including Sullivan and Corbett.

Peter Jackson was a top all around fighter. It could be argued that when Sullivan was older and Corbett was younger that Jackson was the best heavyweight around.

When Corbett was champion he meets with Jackson to sign articles for a title match.

The two had a lengthily meeting. Corbett argued that he won big fights in Jacksonville and New Orleans, so this is where the best gate would be. Jackson did not want to fight in the South. Jackson walked away from the title shot.

Chuck1052 · Post by **Chuck1052** » 23 Dec 2005, 19:04

Until John L. Sullivan fought Jim Corbett, he did not fight in
any long distance bouts under the Marquis of Queenberry
Rules. One should also note that both Corbett and Peter
Jackson fought under such rules exclusively. During a
time of tremendous transition in the boxing world, one
would assume that the boxers became better over time.

- Chuck Johnston

Cojimar 1945 · Post by **Cojimar 1945** » 24 Dec 2005, 02:40

An article in the Chicago Tribune claims Sullivan was soundly beaten by a railway brakeman who weighed only 135 lb in a fierce brawl.

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 24 Dec 2005, 06:37

Lord Lonsdale also claimed he KO`ed Sullivan ...I don`t believe that either.

Cap · Post by **Cap** » 25 Dec 2005, 12:34

A wicked slugger named John Barleycorn put Sullivan on his back more than once. And it wasn't just Jackson he avoided fighting. He backed out of a fight with Canadian light heavyweight George Godfrey at the last minute. He flat-out hated "n-----rs" as was common amongst white folk of his class in those days.

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 26 Dec 2005, 14:26

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:didnt sullivan knock down corbett in the 17th round?

In a book called "Legendary Cahmpions" by Rex Lardner, it indicates that Corbett was knocked down by Sullivan in the 17 tound. However, I have not seen any other reference to this any other book.

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 27 Dec 2005, 13:30

I just noticed that in the "Boxing Register" by James Roberts and Alexander Skutt, it's also mentioned that Sullivan knocked Corbett down in the 17th round.
IMO, a prime Sullivan vs a prime Corbett is a tossup.

Robinson · Post by **Robinson** » 04 Dec 2008, 04:37

In my minds eye I see Jackson winning. BUt I have never like others
here seen either of the two fight.

I would though have loved to have seen what these guys really
were like. Imagine having a DVD carer set off every
great fighter in history.....how awesome would that be.

I am interested in Peter Jackson. What was his best tool ? was he
a good jabber?

Cap · Post by **Cap** » 04 Dec 2008, 09:21

Robinson wrote:In my minds eye I see Jackson winning. BUt I have never like others
here seen either of the two fight.

I would though have loved to have seen what these guys really
were like. Imagine having a DVD carer set off every
great fighter in history.....how awesome would that be.

I am interested in Peter Jackson. What was his best tool ? was he
a good jabber?

Don't take anyone else's word on it. Go to your local library and read all you can on Jackson. As you're in OZ I'd imagine there'd be plenty of material. Peter Jackson was considered by many to be one of the greatest glove fighters of the 19th century.

Cap

Robinson · Post by **Robinson** » 04 Dec 2008, 21:38

Thanks Cap.

I shall do this. I have some reading on Jackson.
Im pretty interested in reading up on him some
more.

ben geoghegan · Post by **ben geoghegan** » 28 Dec 2008, 20:07

Without Muldoon, Jackson would beat Sullivan. Muldoon took a mixed ale Denver Ed Smith (Birmingham's last contribution to prizefighting in a long and glorious history) into the fight of Peter Jackson's life in Chicago.
With Muldoon Sullivan has a chance in deep waters. I mean abyss deep. Somewhere past 40-50 rds.

Question about John L sullivan and Peter Jackson

Question about John L sullivan and Peter Jackson

re

Re: re

re

Jackcon

John L. Sullivan

Sullivan vs railway brakeman

Re: Question about John L sullivan and Peter Jackson

Re: Question about John L sullivan and Peter Jackson

Re: Question about John L sullivan and Peter Jackson

Re: Question about John L sullivan and Peter Jackson