James J Corbett's 3 Best Wins?

[Dr. Z]

NB Exhibitions are NOT fights!
NB Sullivan was born on October the 15th 1858
He fought Corbett on 7th of September 1892 making him 33 ,or one month off of 34.

He had been out of the ring for nearly 4 years.

They are not exhibitions! They are counted as wins, not ND's or sparring sessions! See the link. Sure Sullivan had not fought for three years. Yet you don't put out the same information out there for Jeffries ( he was out of the rings for six years and older than Sullivan was ) when defending your wife beating idol in Jack Johnson. And he best of the sick and homeless once and called African American women a word that I shouldn't say. Tell us why you do this again? No man should beat on women or the sick. Or call them *****'s Such men are sick and are best portrayed in the movie clock work orange.


You can't even admit facts. Posters like you should be dismissed.

[Willow The Wisp]

My approach to formulating a response is a bit adjacent. I take no exception to the less than flattering assessment asserted by Ivich here. Perhaps it is true that Corbett is built more on market appeal and legend than on the depth of his era- bridging resume. Only Perhaps. However, I'm a proponent of the idea, that this is only tangentially related to his....unimpeachable greatness. Sociologically, his toppling of John L. Sullivan ranks as one of the premier feats in all of sports history. That's unassailable. You're welcome to argue and pontificate until the blood runs out of your eyes, but it remains true. And, it's more than enough to warrant numerous books, songs and movies made about him and his impact. His ring merits are held up by small opponents and underwhelming numbers? The very same can ABSOLUTELY be said about far smaller legends in contemporary times like Oleksandr Usyk and Vasyl Lomachenko. And people rush to bestow the label of ATG on them.
And this......Is all 100% truth:

https://********/RTQm6X30VqU

[Ivich]

My approach to formulating a response is a bit adjacent. I take no exception to the less than flattering assessment asserted by Ivich here. Perhaps it is true that Corbett is built more on market appeal and legend than on the depth of his era- bridging resume. Only Perhaps. However, I'm a proponent of the idea, that this is only tangentially related to his....unimpeachable greatness. Sociologically, his toppling of John L. Sullivan ranks as one of the premier feats in all of sports history. That's unassailable. You're welcome to argue and pontificate until the blood runs out of your eyes, but it remains true. And, it's more than enough to warrant numerous books, songs and movies made about him and his impact. His ring merits are held up by small opponents and underwhelming numbers? The very same can ABSOLUTELY be said about far smaller legends in contemporary times like Oleksandr Usyk and Vasyl Lomachenko. And people rush to bestow the label of ATG on them.
And this......Is all 100% truth:

https://********/RTQm6X30VqU

Is anything in my post untrue?
Your film excerpts are from The Great John L,with Greg McClure playing John L,the narrator is Liam Neeson a decent amateur himself

.I first saw the film about 35years ago.
Corbett is important socially and historically to boxing,that is undeniable.
I'm focusing on the quality of his opponents,his resume, not his historical significance.

DR Z it isn't typos that is your problem,it's the fact that you are not even semi -literate.

You have a virus?
You ARE a virus!

[Dr. Z]

Ivich says


NB Exhibitions are NOT fights

!

No exhibitions were listed! Just two no contests one of them was a 61 round draw. Just 11 wins for Corbett right? It appears I have a PC virus. Please excuse the typos.

Apparently my PC was affected by Ivich's ******ity.

[markusmod]

!

No exhibitions were listed! Just two no contests one of them was a 61 round draw. Just 11 wins for Corbett right? It appears I have a PC virus. Please excuse the typos.

Apparently my PC was affected by Ivich's ******ity.

I still marvel at these guys who went an insane amount of rounds like that.

[Dr. Z]

Right. Going 27 round with Choynski and 61 rounds with Jackson. Don't let Ivich's fake news or lies fool you, Jim Corbett won on at least 24 recored fights. These are more names listed where he was the better that aren't clear if they we fights or not. Corbett also fought under the name Jim Dillon which make identifying his early fights more problematic. Here are the 24 wins does not include a listed NC over 61 rounds with Peter Jackson.

Here is it is, Jim Corbett's record:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_J._Corbett

[Willie Pep 229]

Right. Going 27 round with Choynski and 61 rounds with Jackson. Don't let Ivich's fake news or lies fool you, Jim Corbett won on at least 24 recored fights. These are more names listed where he was the better that aren't clear if they we fights or not. Corbett also fought under the name Jim Dillon which make identifying his early fights more problematic. Here are the 24 wins does not include a listed NC over 61 rounds with Peter Jackson.

Here is it is, Jim Corbett's record:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_J._Corbett

Hey care to share the history behind the three Choynski fights? I am ignorant and would like the skinny if you have the moment.

They meet on 30 May 1889 for a 4 round ND and then six days later for a 27 round brawl. And then again only ten days later with Corbett stopping Choynski in four rounds.

Do you know why it played out that way, three fights in 16 days?

[Dr. Z]

Hey care to share the history behind the three Choynski fights? I am ignorant and would like the skinny if you have the moment.

They meet on 30 May 1889 for a 4 round ND and then six days later for a 27 round brawl. And then again only ten days later with Corbett stopping Choynski in four rounds.

Do you know why it played out that way, three fights in 16 days?

Which one or ones? The Choynski fight with Corbett was a ring classic. ( the 27 round fight ) They meet on a barge to avoid police interference. It was a hot, bloody day, full of gameness from both men. Choysnki wore seam gloves in that one. The better to cut Corbett.

A very good 175 pounder fighter he was.

This historical review is good. You can read about that fight and more here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Choynski

[Rosco3387]

I still marvel at these guys who went an insane amount of rounds like that.

Kinda puts Charlie Z in perspective when he wants a break mid first round

[Rosco3387]

Is anything in my post untrue?
Your film excerpts are from The Great John L,with Greg McClure playing John L,the narrator is Liam Neeson a decent amateur himself

.I first saw the film about 35years ago.
Corbett is important socially and historically to boxing,that is undeniable.
I'm focusing on the quality of his opponents,his resume, not his historical significance.

DR Z it isn't typos that is your problem,it's the fact that you are not even semi -literate.

You have a virus?
You ARE a virus!

So regarding Corbett its tough to judge quality of opposition as compared to today. We need a slightly different yardstick. I believe you have to give it to him dominating Choynski, didn't he beat Joe a few times? Kid McCoy was a tough fighter, I don't know under what conditions he fought Corbett... The Sullivan fight is historic. Corbett's best win was perhaps (irony alert) his loss to Fitz.

Corbett was a bare knuckle fighter who fought all his bouts using "mufflers" or what we call "gloves" today. Most of the guys fighting at that time were at least very tough and strong coming from an era where priorities were different*... Corbett definitely played the " 'Mendoza/ Mace' I am a technician among brutes" card. Ultimately Corbett was truly an usher: He ushered in a scientific approach to heavyweight boxing, Beat perhaps the first major international star of boxing ( Sullivan), and was there for the shift to gloves.

*To nullify a hard punch with no gloves, let the punch land on the forehead. Or position oneself so the blow catches an elbow... trap the arm and pull, etc. The guys fighting at this time even up through to Dempsey had to protect the hands at all costs! Kid McCoy's corkscrew, a punch that is alleged to have made many dentists rich men, was a way to develop controlled force using pronation of the hand, hence the value of the technique.