John L. Sullivan: No Racist!

[silkov]

Sullivan may not have been an out and out coward but he was certainly afraid of fighting Peter Jackson... otherwise why didnt he fight him??....

If you knew anything at all about Sullivan, then you wouldn’t even ask such a simple question. It looks like you’ve wasted those 20 those and learned absolutely nothing.

Alright then, why dont you enlighten me and tell me what was couragous about Sullivans refusal to fight Jackson or any other coloured fighter for that matter??... I suppose Corbett was a coward for fighting Jackson??...
you keep criticising what I say but not saying anything to support youre arguements against me... I'm afraid some people here just dont want to face the truth that Sullivan was a racist who was afraid of fighting a coloured fighter... if anyone has any other reason why Sullivan avoided Jackson then I'd like to hear it!....

[The Great John L]

Sullivan may not have been an out and out coward but he was certainly afraid of fighting Peter Jackson... otherwise why didnt he fight him??....

If you knew anything at all about Sullivan, then you wouldn’t even ask such a simple question. It looks like you’ve wasted those 20 those and learned absolutely nothing.

Alright then, why dont you enlighten me and tell me what was couragous about Sullivans refusal to fight Jackson or any other coloured fighter for that matter??... I suppose Corbett was a coward for fighting Jackson??...
you keep criticising what I say but not saying anything to support youre arguements against me... I'm afraid some people here just dont want to face the truth that Sullivan was a racist who was afraid of fighting a coloured fighter...

I’m sorry, but we're all still waiting for your “documented facts” that prove that Sullivan was “certainly afraid of fighting Peter Jackson”.

And as I’ve said several times in this thread, pretty much everyone agrees that Sullivan was a racist, so I don’t see why you feel a need to keep parroting yourself.

There are several short, very concise posts on this thread that answer all of your concerns. I suggest you simply scroll back and reread those posts to answer your concerns.

[Musashi]

Since I'm not 100 years old and wasn't alive at the time of Sullivan...



I have to believe that Sullivan was backed by some very important people. These were very prejudiced times. Quite frankly a time when the white man held the black man down. Literally. I don't think it was so much fear from Sullivan himself in the sense that he was literally afraid of that man, I think it was more of a tactic to once again, hold the black man down. If by some possibility a black man was to defeat John L. Sullivan the whole country would have turned upside down. Which obviously pounds strict consequences onto not only Sullivan, but the backers of Sullivan and serious pressure from the general public to put the title back in the hands of a white man. It's without need of even mentioning (again) that these were very prejudiced times and not far removed from the abolishment of slavery.

Sullivan was as racist as you can get without officially coming out and declaring yourself a member of the KKK or Black Panthers.

[silkov]

If you knew anything at all about Sullivan, then you wouldn’t even ask such a simple question. It looks like you’ve wasted those 20 those and learned absolutely nothing.

Alright then, why dont you enlighten me and tell me what was couragous about Sullivans refusal to fight Jackson or any other coloured fighter for that matter??... I suppose Corbett was a coward for fighting Jackson??...
you keep criticising what I say but not saying anything to support youre arguements against me... I'm afraid some people here just dont want to face the truth that Sullivan was a racist who was afraid of fighting a coloured fighter...

I’m sorry, but we're all still waiting for your “documented facts” that prove that Sullivan was “certainly afraid of fighting Peter Jackson”.

And as I’ve said several times in this thread, pretty much everyone agrees that Sullivan was a racist, so I don’t see why you feel a need to keep parroting yourself.

There are several short, very concise posts on this thread that answer all of your concerns. I suggest you simply scroll back and reread those posts to answer your concerns.

The only parrot here is you mate, if Sullivan wasnt afraid of fighting Jackson then tell me why he didnt fight him then?... its a simple question... are you telling me it took more courage on Sullivans part to avoid fighting Jackson than it would have taken to fight him??....
Once again you're just coming on here and critcising me but not giving any arguments against what I'm saying... as for proof that Sullivan was afriad of fighting Jackson I suggest to do some reading, ...its all there mate...

[The Great John L]

The only parrot here is you mate, if Sullivan wasnt afraid of fighting Jackson then tell me why he didnt fight him then?... its a simple question... are you telling me it took more courage on Sullivans part to avoid fighting Jackson than it would have taken to fight him??....

Why didn’t Dempsey defend his title for 3 years? Why didn’t Johnson defend against Langford or Jeanette? Why didn’t Holmes fight Page? They all must have been cowards, right?

Once again you're just coming on here and critcising me but not giving any arguments against what I'm saying... as for proof that Sullivan was afriad of fighting Jackson I suggest to do some reading, ...its all there mate...

OK chief, what books, or articles present these “facts”? I’m sure just about all of the posters in this thread are very open to expanding our horizons, since you seem to be the only person that has access to these “facts”. Maybe when we read them we’ll also have proof of Nessie and Bigfoot?

I suggest in the future you tone down the rhetoric and you won’t find yourself in such a deep hole.

[barry]

>>>If he wasnt afraid then why didnt he fight Jackson then??<<<

The eaxct same reason that many other white fighters refused to fight colored...the same reason that Jack Johnson refused to face any other colored opponents after Jim Johnson! Using a outlandish comment that just because someone refused to fight another fighter that he is chicken is idiotic. Anyone who has studied boxing history from that time knows that many white fighters, acxtually most white fighters reused to face colored fighters and it didn't have a damn thing to do with being a coward...learn a little more!!!

[barry]

Here's an exact same type of comment back to you silk...being that you are British it should hit a little close, considering that no British fighter ever defended the British title against a colored fighter until Dick Turpin was give a British title fight in 1948 then all of those British champions prior to 1948 must have been nothing but cowards...right silkov? After all, that is the logic that you are using toward Sullivan, so if he is a coward then no doubt 40+ years of British fighters were coward as well...right?


Or how about this one...it's a little more recent. Junior Witter has been after Ricky Hatton for years, but being that Hatton will not fight Witter then he must be nothing but a coward right? If not then why has Hatton refused to fight Witter?

If you don't have a legitimate answer then you just must not be able to handle the truth!!


>>>I suppose Corbett was a coward for fighting Jackson<<<

Being that Corbett never fought George Godfrey, Gus Ruhlin or several other then he must be a coward as well...right Silkov? Silly comments!!! If you don't have the ability to see that going into a roughs gang, as Sullivan did and beat the crap out of the roughs man at the time when Sully did destroys and cowardice claim...then you have a hell of a lot to learn about the area.

By the way...as John L has asked...exactly what have you read about Sullivan to be such a genious on him, but be careful and be honest when you answer because I have read them all and might just ask you to provide some details!

Stupid-ass comments like this is exactly why I have just about quit coming to this forum!!!

[barry]

Being that I do not think you will have an answer for my questions I'll answer the one that you have asked so muc.

The reason that John L. Sullivan never fought George Godfrey, or Peter Jackson was simple! Sullivans most prized possession was his title belt, which he would hold on to as long as he could, but when he did lose the title it was going to go to another white man and not someone of color.

In essense by not fighting Jackson, or Godfrey Sully more, or less just turned them into non-entities of the boxing world and that they would be forgotten and they were forgotten non-entities and they never were able to accomplish anything worthy. Sullivan and other whites felt that if a black man were to win the title it would do away the purity of the sport, which Sully and other whites always had that mean racist manner. Sullivan's reasoning in not fighting Jackson was purely racist...nothing more, nothing less and no cowardice at all!

Sully would eventually make a public challenge in which he included, "all fighters--first come first served--who are white". I will not fight a negro. I never have and never shall."

[HomicideHenry]

Sullivan also said he never would fight a foreigner, yet he fought Englishman Charie Mitchell and sought fights against Jem Mace, but they fell through. Though I must add when Sullivan lost to Corbett he said he was glad that at least an American won the title.

[barry]

Sullivan never said that he would not fight a foreigner!!!

Irish...you just need to be quite instead pulling all this nonsense out of your ass!

Before you say anything else about Sullivan then I would suggest that you get the new Sullivan biography written by Adam Pollack and get the Sullivan biography written by Isenberg and read both. The you will be able to make some valid and factual comments!

"Though I must add when Sullivan lost to Corbett he said he was glad that at least an American won the title."

The is the only accurate comment that you have made, but sorry, that comment does not translate into Sullivan saying that he would never fight a foreigner!

The actual fact...Sully fought a lot of foreigners, between 15 and 20!!!!

[HomicideHenry]

The only foreigners Sullivan defended the title against were:

Slade and Mitchell, the latter from England and the former from NZ

But the Police Gazette (an American boxing publication) arranged those fights stating they felt those two were the 'best' to challenge Sullivan and by that time both Slade and Mitchell were fighting mostly in the USA. As for Sullivan's English/Irish tours he fought all exhibitions, not legit fights for the title.

I know damned well Sullivan was quoted at one time that he would never ever defend the title against a foreigner. I read it/seen it with my own eyes in one of the many different articles I've seen on Sullivan.

And, I say look who's talking, because I have yet to see anyone provide much proof to their allegations either as John L. has said before, please provide such proof that Sullivan was a 'coward' as you make him out to be. So far this whole thread has been nothing but mere speculation and no solid evidence to prove either side is right/wrong.

You say 'go read apollack's book' but yet you yourself cant really answer the questions since your implying you have read the book---if apollack has said that Sullivan was a coward like you and silkov are saying he was---then the book cant be worth its salt and is inaccurate and aint worth the $45 it costs.

[barry]

I've got the books and I have the Police Gazette articles and I have many other newspaper articles, you on the other hand, well what you say speaks for itself and like everything else that I have seen you post recently...it's all in your mind. Only a clown would make such claims, especially since there is a lot of proof to the contrary, such as you saying Sullivan said he would never defend against a foreigner...guess what...he did idiot!

Look Jr. You clearly are in over your head...better to wise up and kept quite on that which you do not know, or you will just continue to look like an idiot...such as calling Jim Corbett a middleweight, or Sullivan not a racist! I have heard some clueless statements over the years on this forum and your comments in these two threads are as wrong and clueless and as any! But these are the only two that I have actually read and from what people have stated in trhe two thread you are very consistent in posting lame nonsense!

No maybe if you could produce an article which states something you said then maybe you might get a little recognition, but continuing with these bullshit, well you might be able to pull it on people more clueless than yourself, but there are people like me that do know about it and most likely we will call you on it every time, so how about you start showing a little proof instead of yanking nonsense out of your ass!

And what questions are you yapping about that I have not answered...are you blind as well...I stated clearly the question that Silkov asked...now what is your questions? Are you one of those clowns that cannot recognize an answer from a question? Ask me something...not only with I answer it, but I'll provide the documentation to back it!

[barry]

>>>And, I say look who's talking, because I have yet to see anyone provide much proof to their allegations either as John L.<<<

It's a little hard to come up with something to refute a claim that did not happen never happened...you see the problem is... being that Sully never stated that he would never defend against a foreigner there are no articles. What, do you think there is an article that we can bring out that says "John L. Sullivan never said that he would not defend against a foreigner?" LOL...priceless...LOL!

Also, since you seem to have no clue I doubt very much that the Police Gazette arranged the fight with Mitchell, I don't recall who did off the top of my head, but you can be sure that I will look it up! Richard Fox, the owner and publisher of the Police Gazette absolutely hated Sullivan and Sullivan did not care about Fox either, so even if Police Gazette ever did state something like that, which they didn't, then the possibility of it being a lie is about as unlikely as you are to be right on the topic!

[HomicideHenry]

Also, since you seem to have no clue I doubt very much that the Police Gazette arranged the fight with Mitchell, I don't recall who did off the top of my head, but you can be sure that I will look it up! Richard Fox, the owner and publisher of the Police Gazette absolutely hated Sullivan and Sullivan did not care about Fox either, so even if Police Gazette ever did state something like that, which they didn't, then the possibility of it being a lie is about as unlikely as you are to be right on the topic!

Fox did set up the Slade and Mitchell fights and the Kilrain fight. He even presented Kilrain with the 'Police Gazette' belt saying that Kilrain was the true champion and the people of Boston were so outraged that they made Sullivan a belt of his own. Fox kept putting up challengers to Sullivan and Sullivan kept beating them and if there's any truth to the story of Sullivan dismissing Fox at a bar because the ediotor of the Ploice Gazette wanted Sullivan to sit with him at the booth---it shows that pretty much from that point on Fox raged war against Sullivan for embarassing him in public.

[barry]

Well that is the first accurate statement that you have made in this thread! I knew that Fox set up the Kilrain and Slade bouts, or was part of the fights, but I do not remember about Mitchell. I also e-mailed Adam Pollack, who wrote the most recent book on Sullivan to see if he had ever read any comments by Sullivan claiming that he would never defend against a foreigner!

[HomicideHenry]

Mitchell at the time was the English MW champion if I am not mistaken, but Fox believed that Mitchell would have been the man to beaten John L, considering how Mitchell had basically ran through all of the best English MW's and HW's. I believe it was the first Mitchell bout that the two men fought that Fox set up---then there was to be another match but Sullivan said he was sick---then they fought again (dunno if Fox set that one up) and Sullivan beat him again, and then there was the English tour Sullivan had where he tried to get fights with Jem Mace but begotiations fell through and not too long afterward Sullivan defended the title again against Mitchell in France which was declared a draw as both men were too tired to continue, but Sullivan was pissed off by the ruling cus he knocked Mitchell down some 30+ times.

But to best of my knowledge was only the first bout they had that was under Fox's watchful eye, because after that he summoned Herbert Slade to defeat Sullivan and John L. knocked Slade out in 3 rounds or so.

[HomicideHenry]

I just came across a very odd thing while on my search on literature and facts on John L. Sullivan, where this site (was a short bio on Peter Jackson) claimed that Sullivan had previously fought a black man but refused to fight Jackson anyways:

However, most top fighters shunned him for racial or competitive reasons. John L. Sullivan, the heavyweight champion and the most famous American boxer, stated, "I will not fight a Negro. I never have, and I never shall." Although Sullivan had actually faced a black opponent previously, he would not change his stance regarding Jackson.

http://www.ibhof.com/jackson.htm


It doesnt give reference though as to WHO the black man was. The only black man I ever knew Sullivan ever even attempted to fight was George Godfrey but police stepped in before the bout could take place.

[barry]

They were probably speaking of Slade as he was half Aborigine!

[HomicideHenry]

Well if Slade was half black, the question arises, since everyone has been saying Sullivan was too 'cowardly' to fight a black man, who is black enough and who isn't? I have seen many a man/woman who were part white and completely discredit this and proclaim to be nothing but white, but then there are black groups who feel that they are 'too white'.

Now the term mulatto isn't generally used these days, either someone is black or white in today's culture. So was Slade a black man? In my perception, if what you claim to say is true, then yes he is. You can't take away heritage, irregardless however someone's appearance is.

So by the Police Gazette, after Sullivan demolished Mitchell, Herbet Slade was the #1 contender in the world worthy enough to fight Sullivan, so by opinion of the Police Gazette (the RING magazine of its time) Slade, a black man, was the #1 man, and Sullivan beat that man.

Then throw in the three attempts at fighting George Godfrey...doesn't sound like Sullivan was drawing such a color line after all...he just drew the line against Peter Jackson.

[Collins2000]

They were probably speaking of Slade as he was half Aborigine!

Actually, he was part maori wasn't he?

[HomicideHenry]

I just checked Slade's record, it said his father was Irish and his mother was Maori, he was often called 'The Great Maori' and was more an accomplished wrestler than boxer. Also seen his picture, he looks more like a Indian than an Aborigine.

But will have to say this does show in ways John L. would fight men of color. I also found this excerpt from Cyber Boxing Zone under John L. Sullivan's record, which shows of another attempt, early on in Sullivan's career, of fighting blacks:

Apr 20 Johnson Rochester, NY SCH
-This bout was scheduled but not held;
Johnson, who was black, did not show

Not much to go by here, but back then there were alot of blacks who didn't have full names, but went by their former/current slave owners last name, which could have been this case.

[Brutu]

Its ridiculous to even view John L. Sullivan's boxing career with 21st Century standards.
First of all (in the 1880's)In America ,Black people werent even allowed to attend social functions of White people(unless Black people were part of the hired help)
Did you know that even in Jack Johnson's time,the audience of the
Apollo Theatre in Harlem was lily White?
Black people only entertained on stage and could not interact with the White people.

[barry]

European visitors refered to the New Zealnders of that race as Indian, Natives, Maori, Aborigine and New Zelanders. Whether he actually was part Aborigine I don't know.

But in response to Irish's comment about Sullivan claiming that he would not defend against a foreigner, well as I said he never stated that, but here is what Adam Pollack told me about it:

"No. He never drew any type of line against foreigners. In fact, at times he said that he would rather fight a foreigner than defeat one of his own countrymen. After he lost to Corbett, he did say he was glad the title remained in America."

[HomicideHenry]

Maybe I have the foreigner satement confused with Jim Jefferies. I know I have heard one of the early HW champions say something about foreigners because many former champions went nuts when Tommy Burns said he would defend the title against any race (black/white etc) from any place as he didnt want to just be the 'white champion' or 'american champion', he wanted to be known as the first 'true' world champion.

I just always figured it was Sullivan because he was so patriotic and made that big huge speel about Corbett beating him and how he was glad an American won; I know I have seen an article somewhere with one of the early HW champions saying that. I apologise for the mix up.

[barry]

Well Irish, you have done something that a lot on here cannot do and admit that you were wrong...kudo's!