Peter McNeeley and Pop, Could They?

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

Could either Peter or Tom Jr. beat any of the champions in the 100+ years of the heavy belt starting with John L?

Perhaps more importantly, both around the same frame size, so who would win if they faced each other in a title eliminator?

The future of the planet hangs on these answers, so serious efforts only.

Have at it gentlemen>>>>>

[Robinson]

I think if we transplanted either man at their best to any of the men
in John L's era, then yes they no doubt would win.

[dempseyfire]

I think if we transplanted either man at their best to any of the men
in John L's era, then yes they no doubt would win.

Based on what? The likes of Sullivan, Corbett, and Jackson would've destroyed the McNeeleys. But of course you think all pre-1920s HWs sucked so what else is new . . . .

[HomicideHenry]

You cannot just assume that a modern day fighter could easily dominate in the olden times. Take away the rules of today and make the gloves smaller or completely non-existant, its all fair game. John L. Sullivan more than likely would have defeated Muhammad Ali under the rules of his time, every bit as much as Ali defeating Sullivan under his rules.

The McNeeley's, however, I dont think even in the 1980's or during the Hart/Burns era, would have become champion, more than likely a contender or title challenger, but never champion.

[Collins2000]

I've never see the old man fight, but Peter was shite.

Must be a slow weekend if we are reduced to talking about Peter mcNeeley.

[Robinson]

Ive never seen Sullivan fight so like everyone else I can only assume.

I guess consuming boiled mutton and taking long walks while arm sparring
is enough, even to beat a regional fighter like Peter McNeeley.

I know DF feels that Sullivan would have KO'd the Klitschko's in one or
something like that, all because of his superior diet of brandy, whiskey
and that pre 20th staple that kept so many healthy.

I just am not that impressed by many of the earlier fighters, in head to
head settings, sure they were pioneers and tough men of their era.
I respect them for such achievements and for the bravery in the ring and
planting the roots for the sport.

I just do not have the Bert Sugar faith and romance that in the past we
have purity and superiority.

Even if we are just talking about the McNeeley's.

[HomicideHenry]

Peter was a brawler, so was his old man. Sullivan, despite popular belief, could box, though he is best known for his kayo ability. He was quite the feinter. Pretend he would strike with a left or right, then charge in with the other hand, always confusing his opponents. I just dont see either McNeeley standing up to Sullivan in a brawl, considering Sullivan could fight for hours on end bare knuckle and had some 400 knockouts (exhibitions included) throughout his career.

[Robinson]

How do you know he was all these things ??

I also hear that Sullivan could punch a barn over with one
mighty swat and that he could pull a locomotive off the
railway with his grip....

These hour long bouts were not as fast paced or action
packed as compressed round by round bouts we have today
this is why they changed the rules so as to make the fights
faster and more intense...

just as they did with MMA, amateur wrestling etc....in 1912 the
longest wrestling match ever went for 13 hrs..does this mean
they would beat Karelin or Dan Gable ??

You know walking for hours is easier than sprinting 400 metres
in seconds...

Fighting at a faster pace against trained athletes is very hard.

fighting town tough's, strong men, former wrestlers, bar room
macho's and other bare knuckler's is not as hard as facing
semi or actual pro's with proper training.

[HomicideHenry]

That be true, but, under the conditions of the past athletes, its an evenly matches bout at the very least. Todays guys are conditioned to be more action packed, while the guys back then prepared for the long haul, a fight could end in 10 seconds or 10 hours.

[dempseyfire]

Ive never seen Sullivan fight so like everyone else I can only assume.

I guess consuming boiled mutton and taking long walks while arm sparring
is enough, even to beat a regional fighter like Peter McNeeley.

I know DF feels that Sullivan would have KO'd the Klitschko's in one or
something like that, all because of his superior diet of brandy, whiskey
and that pre 20th staple that kept so many healthy.

I just am not that impressed by many of the earlier fighters, in head to
head settings, sure they were pioneers and tough men of their era.
I respect them for such achievements and for the bravery in the ring and
planting the roots for the sport.

I just do not have the Bert Sugar faith and romance that in the past we
have purity and superiority.

Even if we are just talking about the McNeeley's.

When did I say Sullivan KOs the Klitschkos in 1?? I'm not the one making ridiculous statements like Peter McNeely could've defeated John L. Sullivan or Jim Corbett . .

You talk like you know much about the era, as you clearly don't. Sullivan and other's training regimens at the time were incredibly intense, not just walks and consumption of liquor . . .for someone who likes to smash 'myths' you seem to have embraced the ones that support your biased viewpoint.

For a fighter like yourself, I find it hard that you can envision that the world class bareknucklers in Sullivan's era were nothing more than local toughs who drank all day and all they knew of fighting was wild swings and roundhouse blows. These were WORLD CHAMPS . . .I can pick out two drunks on the street who will figure out how to throw a left jab . . so apprently men of the late 19th century/early 20th century had peanut sized brains and couldn't figure out the basic tenets of fighting
Oh yes, the evolution of man, as evident through the skills and conditioning of Peter McNeely . . .no we don't have film of John L, but we do have film of men who came just a few years late (Corbett, Fitz, Burns) and I have no doubt they would have obliterated the McNeely family, be the gloves be 4 ounces or 40 ounces . . .

[Robinson]

DF

Good sir would you be able to put me in the direction where I can find
info on Sullivan's training regime.

That would be greatly appreciated.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

I think if we transplanted either man at their best to any of the men
in John L's era, then yes they no doubt would win.

- Am I to assume from the responses recieved, John L is the only possible champ they could beat?

Ignoring the controversy around your rating of John L, you don't think they'd have had a chance against Leon or Ali in 78? Was there ever a weaker year for the heavy champ than that one?

Floyd Patterson is a respected HOFer, so it begs the question of why he was fighting Senior. At least when Tyson fought Junior it was considered a shake the rust off fight, not a title fight. Unfortunately for Tyson not a single fleck of rust got knocked off in the bout given how early the McNeeley's tossed the towel.

Noticed nobody addressed on which was the better McNeeley if matched against each other, but now I'm wondering, just who is the worst heavy title contender in history?

Are the McNeeley's more credible than Jean Coopman, Battling Jim Johnson, Tony Ross, What the Heck Were They Thinkin', They Must've Been Drinkin' Beck, Lorenzo Zanon, Lucien Rodriguez and famously Pete Rademacher, 0-0-0 record coming into his Patterson title challenge? Jeffries had a defense against some unlikely chap who's name escapes me, so there is a long history of poorly regarded contenders.

What if we staged a round "robinson" tournament of the worst ever, who would be guaranteed to come out on the bottom?

[dempseyfire]

DF

Good sir would you be able to put me in the direction where I can find
info on Sullivan's training regime.

That would be greatly appreciated.

Does Adam Pollack still post here??? He's written books on Fitz and Corbett which go into their traning routines in detail. Better yet buy his books.

I think by both looking at the film and records that papa Tom is better than Peter. His split decision loss to Cleroux is better than anything Peter ever did (besides Peter's pre-fight talk of him knocking out Tyson . . .that was hilarious)

Rademacher would've beaten Tom if they'd ever fought.

[HomicideHenry]

Apollack wrote on John L. Sullivan rather extensively as well. Robinson should study up more on the bare knucklers as well as the early Marquis of Queensbury fighters and champions. Hell, even Tracy Callis from CBZ ranks Jefferies in the top five still today.

[Robinson]

I think if we transplanted either man at their best to any of the men
in John L's era, then yes they no doubt would win.

- Am I to assume from the responses recieved, John L is the only possible champ they could beat?

Ignoring the controversy around your rating of John L, you don't think they'd have had a chance against Leon or Ali in 78? Was there ever a weaker year for the heavy champ than that one?

Floyd Patterson is a respected HOFer, so it begs the question of why he was fighting Senior. At least when Tyson fought Junior it was considered a shake the rust off fight, not a title fight. Unfortunately for Tyson not a single fleck of rust got knocked off in the bout given how early the McNeeley's tossed the towel.

Noticed nobody addressed on which was the better McNeeley if matched against each other, but now I'm wondering, just who is the worst heavy title contender in history?

Are the McNeeley's more credible than Jean Coopman, Battling Jim Johnson, Tony Ross, What the Heck Were They Thinkin', They Must've Been Drinkin' Beck, Lorenzo Zanon, Lucien Rodriguez and famously Pete Rademacher, 0-0-0 record coming into his Patterson title challenge? Jeffries had a defense against some unlikely chap who's name escapes me, so there is a long history of poorly regarded contenders.

What if we staged a round "robinson" tournament of the worst ever, who would be guaranteed to come out on the bottom?

I like your thinking....

Im onto it.....a 16 man tourny of the worse challengers ever ;)

I do not know which is the best of the McNeeley's. I think Tom was most
likely better, he did not have the Ray Cyrus mullet.

I think the man you were reffering to that Jeffries gave a title shot to was
Jack Finnegan, but I am told that boxrec has an incomplete record and does
not take into account the several wins he had over capable and ranked opponents.

I suppose Joe Kennedy is another Jeffries title challenger that could be
considered undeserving.

[Robinson]

DF

Good sir would you be able to put me in the direction where I can find
info on Sullivan's training regime.

That would be greatly appreciated.

Does Adam Pollack still post here??? He's written books on Fitz and Corbett which go into their traning routines in detail. Better yet buy his books.

I think by both looking at the film and records that papa Tom is better than Peter. His split decision loss to Cleroux is better than anything Peter ever did (besides Peter's pre-fight talk of him knocking out Tyson . . .that was hilarious)

Rademacher would've beaten Tom if they'd ever fought.

I shall look it up.

I think Rademacher vs McNeeley sr would have been a pretty good fight. I agree
that Rademacher would have won that won.