Something on Champions - 1896

[Marchegiano]

Fans write to ask that pet sporting question: "Was John L Sullivan champion of the world and if not why did he carry the belt for so long?"

The ex-slugger from Boston was for years heralded as champion of the world, but it was a hollow title, for he never won it.

Pugilism ls a recognized sport In three countries, America, England and Australia, and South Africa should now be Included. When Sullivan came to the front as at fighter the title of champion of America was Paddy Ryan, m man considerably older than John L., and a man not in the best of physical condition. Sullivan beat Ryan at Mississippi City on Feb. 2, 1882, and was heralded as "champion of the world," though not entitled to {t. After that he added to bis reputation by knocking out a score of third-raters and religiously refused to battle with Peter Jackson, the champion of Australia, who certainly would have proved his master. Jake Kilrain, a second-rater, challenged Sullivan, and John refused to meet him, Then Kilrain journeyed to England and challenged Jem Smith for "the championship of the world"-a title that either one of them was as much entitled to as he would be to the title "Pope of Rome." Sullivan Beat Kilrain. Smith and Killrain boxed to a draw, and then, Kilrain returning to America, Sullivan was forced to battle him. Sullivan won handily. The World Almanac, thought by many to be an authority, rules that Sullivan was champion of the world, winning that title by defeating Paddy Ryan, who in turn came Into possession of the title by beating Joe Goss, Many take issue with the World, on the score that Sullivan never defeated Peter Jackson, the champion of Australia, and came within an once of meeting defeat when he boxed a draw with Charley Mitchell at Chantilly, France, on March 10, 1888, At that time the Boston man was clearly bested, and the story that Sullivan's backer Harry Phillips, paid Mitchell £1750 to consent to a draw has never been refuted. - It will be seen from the above how hollow was Sullivan's claim to the title of champion of the world. He defeated the American champion, an old man, nearly lost to the champion boxer of England, and drew the color line on the champion of Australia, Jim Corbett has not a clear title to the championship, though his is better than was Sullivan's. Jim beat Sullivan at New Orleans with ease. Drew a 61 round contest with Peter Jackson and smothered Charlie Mitchell at Jacksonville, FL., on Jan. 35, 1890. With but one blot against his record -that of the "no contest"- -Corbett Is more entitled to the title champion of the world than Sullivan ever was.

In regards to the belt, It is evident fans forget Sullivan's belt was a present from a crowd of admiring sports who raised money and bought the emblem outright making Sullivan a present of it. The so-called championship belt was donated by Richard K. Fox, but Sullivan designated it a "dog collar," and never accepted it. This is the belt that went to Jim Corbett and was afterwards stolen from him

There is but one world's champion at present, and that is Boston's dusky featherweight, George Dixon.

The battle between Fitzsimmons and Corbett will settle the championship of America and England, because Corbett holds them. Peter Jackson or Peter Felix must be disposed of and then the championship of Australia will be secure.

---

I did my best cleaning up the spelling and grammar while trying to keep it original.


I have expressed similar sentiments here prior. I don't honestly even view Sullivan as a queensberry champion let alone world. Simply never won that title. Tied the Englishman using LPR rules with gloves and was given a title for it. That's without the accusation Chuckles was paid off.

To each their own, but I do agree with the Buffalo.


Dunno why the forum adds characters. I've tried to limit it. I'm sure it happens to you guys too. Promise I don't even know how to type out some of those symbols!

[Willow The Wisp]

Bullocks, as my friends in the UK would say.
Do the legwork.

[billeau2]

What was needed back then was a long distant relative of Kafkod, or the likes, to create a new organization that would crown a proper champ! Certainly one could be found amongst the many bar fly in any particular area. Once risen from a drunken slumber such a champ would be official!

Instead? we got was a world still large, people still travelling for months, weeks, days on end. Shame on such a world for not guaranteeing that the best in the world fought the best in the world. Shame on such a world for giving the authority to the fans who knew the fighters and followed their fighters as they fought in the ring to determine the best.

[billeau2]

---

I did my best cleaning up the spelling and grammar while trying to keep it original.


I have expressed similar sentiments here prior. I don't honestly even view Sullivan as a queensberry champion let alone world. Simply never won that title. Tied the Englishman using LPR rules with gloves and was given a title for it. That's without the accusation Chuckles was paid off.

To each their own, but I do agree with the Buffalo.


Dunno why the forum adds characters. I've tried to limit it. I'm sure it happens to you guys too. Promise I don't even know how to type out some of those symbols!

How would he have "won it?" Dodging authorities to fight on a barge? They did that... Flying a yet uninvented airplane, or perhaps a blimp, or hot air balloon to distant lands? Maybe they could jet off to a neutral country? Using rubber bands for takeoff. Creating an international undisputed champion was a wonderful idea, but there were tremendous obstacles to doing so. Legal obstacles chief amongst them.

[Marchegiano]

How would he have "won it?" Dodging authorities to fight on a barge? They did that... Flying a yet uninvented airplane, or perhaps a blimp, or hot air balloon to distant lands? Maybe they could jet off to a neutral country? Using rubber bands for takeoff. Creating an international undisputed champion was a wonderful idea, but there were tremendous obstacles to doing so. Legal obstacles chief amongst them.

Great point bill!! Want to call it a draw and give me a title do ya?

[Marchegiano]

Bullocks, as my friends in the UK would say.
Do the legwork.

Step or don't bud.



In terms of respecting the knowledge, what is it that you have ever posted to qualify telling me to do anything? You, my increasingly antagonistic friend, are not travesyny. Know your role. Post something beyond your own opinion. Get cited for something. Do some work that you can prove you did. Then maybe when you say "do the legwork" it will be an actual allusion to something I may not know rather than the whiney little ***** crying of a man who can't stand a variant perspective.

[Willow The Wisp]

Step or don't bud.



In terms of respecting the knowledge, what is it that you have ever posted to qualify telling me to do anything? You, my increasingly antagonistic friend, are not travesyny. Know your role. Post something beyond your own opinion. Get cited for something. Do some work that you can prove you did. Then maybe when you say "do the legwork" it will be an actual allusion to something I may not know rather than the whiney little ***** crying of a man who can't stand a variant perspective.

17456142537739110865242782526328.jpg
Do not ever be offended by me March II. As my wife will tell ya, I know next to nothing. Besides.....I retired from the keyboard warrior circuit decades ago. And really, it was the Buffalo staff writer I take issue with.

Now go get your shine box!

[billeau2]

Great point bill!! Want to call it a draw and give me a title do ya?

You always have the title brudder! besides they would not even give me a points decision over Queenie. But seriously there are few who look at research in select areas that few will venture into. Your understanding of when boxing became about an individual quest, how it ties into the whole Promethean ideal is imo brilliant. YOu show the history and the pieces fall into place. I do similar R&D about movement skills in the martial arts, very few appreciate these areas. So we could have a million differences and it still would matter little... Point in fact we don't have many differences of opinion, but I never look at that as important if the person has good reasons.

Also, I always consider carefully the opinions of those whom I respect. I really had no insight into Nat... Despite always feeling like a lot of the stuff people wrote was similar to how the pulps operated: The creator of "The Shadow" grrew up with Doyle vis a vis Sherlock Holmes, and created a kind of version in the Shadow, then the creator of Batman kind of ripped the Shadow off lol... When I saw your Nat screed it made me think of this process lol. Which is why I was asking you for your take.

[billeau2]

17456142537739110865242782526328.jpg
Do not ever be offended by me March II. As my wife will tell ya, I know next to nothing. Besides.....I retired from the keyboard warrior circuit decades ago. And really, it was the Buffalo staff writer I take issue with.

Now go get your shine box!

We grew up in a generation where to be a keyboard warrior one had to own a typewriter.

[billeau2]

Step or don't bud.



In terms of respecting the knowledge, what is it that you have ever posted to qualify telling me to do anything? You, my increasingly antagonistic friend, are not travesyny. Know your role. Post something beyond your own opinion. Get cited for something. Do some work that you can prove you did. Then maybe when you say "do the legwork" it will be an actual allusion to something I may not know rather than the whiney little ***** crying of a man who can't stand a variant perspective.

You guys happen to be two of the most well informed posters... You need to stick together! Willow's lists, for example, are well researched and very well thought out, among other stuff presented. I have mentioned what I think of your R&D here enough so people know how I come down on your posting.

Just my two cents,