John L. Sullivan

[apollack]

Jason, thank you for your excellent review. I have been anxiously awaiting it, and hope that your fellow readers know you well enough to trust your positive review.

I have two reasons for leaving out a detailed discussion of the Corbett fight. First, because I believe the fight to be meaningless, as Sullivan had done next to nothing in terms of serious boxing for over THREE years, was fat, drunk almost nightly, horribly trained, pretty much said he was retired during those years and certainly acted like it. But the REAL reason I did not discuss it is because I didn't want to tell the story twice. I am going to tell it in exhaustive detail in my Corbett biography, which will be up next. The bout really fits better into the story of Jim Corbett than it does with the story of John L. Sullivan. You will get all that you want of that story in part two of what I hope will become a series (assuming I can get a publisher - which will probably depend on how well the Sullivan book does).

Thanks so much. Please spread the word about my book wherever you can.

[jason100x]

It was my pleasure commenting on the book. It was a very impressive achievement and the best of luck to you with it! I hope that it sells very well as I look forward to reading your Jim Corbett book and whatever other subjects you intend to tackle in your series. This book is a welcome addition to my already very crowded book collection and I'll do what I can to show it off and tell people so that maybe they'll pick up copies.

Another point. Earlier in this thread I mentioned William Muldoon and how he seems like a fascinating character with a long involvment in boxing since he bridged Sullivan's time with Dempsey's time. It would be great if you could apply your writing skills to a biography of him. I haven't seen anything written specifically on him and I would certainly buy a book on his life.

[apollack]

books

Right now I'm trying to obtain a publisher for book 2 in the series, which will be on James J. Corbett.

There is a book on Muldoon. Haven't read it, but Clay Moyle, a collector I respect and admire very much, probably has a copy:

VAN EVERY, EDWARD "MULDOON, THE SOLID MAN OF SPORT" 1929 NEW YORK, FREDERICK A. STOKES COMPANY

[Southpaw Stinger]

Right now I'm trying to obtain a publisher for book 2 in the series, which will be on James J. Corbett.

There is a book on Muldoon. Haven't read it, but Clay Moyle, a collector I respect and admire very much, probably has a copy:

VAN EVERY, EDWARD "MULDOON, THE SOLID MAN OF SPORT" 1929 NEW YORK, FREDERICK A. STOKES COMPANY

Do you have any future plans to write somthing on Jim Jeffries? It's hard to find many books with much info about him in.

[apollack]

Yup. But I'm doing it in order. Jeff will be after Fitz. All will be written like I did Sullivan - based on multiple local next day newspaper reports, even Fitzsimmons (I've obtain at great cost a number of local Australian newspapers from the time).

[The Raging Bull]

Yup. But I'm doing it in order. Jeff will be after Fitz. All will be written like I did Sullivan - based on multiple local next day newspaper reports, even Fitzsimmons (I've obtain at great cost a number of local Australian newspapers from the time).

Were can I buy your books, bearing in mind I live in the UK?

[apollack]

Sullivan

Book is available via most online dealers.

Just type search terms and you'll find it.

John L. Sullivan: The Career of the First Gloved Heavyweight Champion, by Adam Pollack

[The Raging Bull]

Book is available via most online dealers.

Just type search terms and you'll find it.

John L. Sullivan: The Career of the First Gloved Heavyweight Champion, by Adam Pollack

Ok thankyou

[apollack]

New Sullivan book

Check out this new review of the Sullivan book:

Review of Adam Pollack's, John L. Sullivan: The Career of the First Gloved Heavyweight Champion

11.01.07 - By Zachary Q. Daniels: Unlike most boxing biographies, Adam Pollack's John L. Sullivan: The Career of the First Gloved Heavyweight Champion is not a chronicle of his life and times, but rather an extensively documented history of his boxing career. Readers who are interested in stories of Sullivan's drinking habits and later conversion to evangelism will have to look elsewhere—but those interested in "The Boston Strongboy's" performance in the ring will find a wealth of information likely unobtainable outside of library microfilm machines. What Pollack has done is to reconstruct the details of Sullivan's career using almost exclusively primary sources that describe the various fights Sullivan participated in immediately after they occurred, rather than relying on secondary sources published decades later. This gives the book an historical authenticity that is usually absent from most boxing biographies.

He begins by describing the context of Sullivan's career by explaining the state of the sport in the 1870s when Sullivan began his career, providing insight into the rules under which Sullivan fought, in both bare-knuckle and gloved bouts.

Particularly interesting is the fact that Sullivan, from the start of his career fought with gloves, under the Marquis of Queensberry rules—as well as under the earlier bare-knuckle London Prize Ring rules.

In fact, it appears that the majority of his bouts, particularly if one includes the many "exhibitions" he fought—many of which appear to have been actual fights disguised under this label—were gloved contests. At this time, there was a distinction between prizefights, which were fought bare-knuckle under the London rules, and exhibitions, which were fought with gloves under the Queensberry rules. Sullivan, from the beginning, preferred the latter, and only periodically engaged in bare-knuckle fights. This is quite in contrast to the standard portrayal of him as largely a bare-knuckle fighter.

Pollack recounts the details of all of the various exhibitions and prize-fights in which Sullivan participated, and one of the things that becomes clear in this review is that the line between the two was often blurred, and intentionally so as to get around the fact that while prizefighting was illegal in most jurisdictions, "exhibitions of skill" were not. Thus, in some cases, gloved contests advertised as exhibitions were broken up by law enforcement officials when it became clear they were fighting "for real." This happened more than once throughout Sullivan's career.

Another thing that emerges from Pollack's detailed review of the primary sources for Sullivan's major fights is that there are often inconsistencies in the reports concerning what actually happened in each fight, when fights ended, what particular punches were landed when, and other details. Given that there is no film of Sullivan's fights for contemporary analysts to review, it is impossible to fully reconcile these varying accounts, but Pollack does an excellent job in attempting to do so. Thankfully, in most cases, the discrepancies are confined primarily to minor details. One case where the issue is not so minor concerns the length and reasons for termination of his fight with Dominick McCaffrey in 1885. Primary source accounts place the ending at either the 6th or 7th round, and some differ as to whether a decision was even rendered by the referee. Pollack does an excellent job of explaining all the confusion and offers his novel analysis and conclusions using both national and local newspapers.

The ambiguity of Sullivan's drawing of the color line is well—dealt with throughout the book. Pollack recounts an incident where Sullivan agreed to box black fighter George Godfrey in 1888, and reports that that he had been matched to box Godfrey back in 1880 or 1881, although this was apparently prevented by police. Sullivan's apparent vacillations on whether he was willing to meet top contender Peter Jackson are also recounted in detail, and some solid details on Jackson's career are provided from primary sources.

In fact, a unique feature of this book throughout is the attention it pays to providing details on Sullivan's opponents—who they were, who they fought, what their general status in the sport of boxing was at the time. This helps give the reader a clear idea of the significance of various fights, which ones were against solid contenders who were legitimate threats, and which fights were of lesser significance. This provision of "perspective" is often absent in standard works on boxers—if they cover their fights in any detail at all, it is often only the major ones, leaving the reader wondering what the rest of the fighter's career was like. Pollack spares no detail when recounting Sullivan’s boxing career during his prime years.

Some will object to the relatively sparse coverage Pollack gives to the Corbett fight in 1892, an omission he justifies on the grounds that it will be covered in his next book on Corbett's career. This is perhaps understandable from a researcher's perspective, but the relatively brief coverage of such a significant fight does leave the reader wishing for more detail, particularly given the wealth of information this book provides on other fights. On the other hand, it certainly does wet the appetite among dedicated boxing fans and historians for more, which is perhaps the intention.

Overall, then, this book is a superb—and, in many ways, unique—contribution to the boxing literature. It is not an easy book to read, given its attention to detail and quasi-academic style—but it is most definitely worth the effort for those boxing fans who really want to know the details of Sullivan's career through the eyes of those who actually saw him fight. As none of Sullivan's fights were filmed, this is as close as boxing fans of today can get to actually seeing him—which speaks volumes about the quality and detail of the research Pollack has undertaken.

[QueensburyRules]

Sir, I think you will find my Sullivan book interesting and informative. It is important because it explains how boxing's first star was born, so to speak. It explains how boxing was really put on the map as a main****** sport. Sullivan is a very powerful figure whose importance transcends time and race. Now, was he a bigot? Yes. But so were a ton of other athletes and others who were of big importance in sport and in other areas of life at that time. That doesn't mean their lives aren't interesting or that you can't learn something from studying them.

For what it is worth, I extensively discuss the color line and place it in context. I was surprised to find that there were strong arguments on both sides of the issue, but that actually boxing was THE ONE SPORT where arguments for fair play and equal opportunity were lodged by a large segment of the media and sporting public, pretty significant for the 1880s, only two decades removed from the Civil War. Keep in mind, racial separatism was the order of the day in almost every area of life, so Sullivan wasn't an anomaly, but rather a reflection of his times' social mores. Still, surprisingly, he did endure a lot of criticism for drawing the color line. I extensively report on that criticism. I think you'll find it fascinating. As a boxing fan, it makes me feel good to know that the sport I love, which has been perceived as depraved by its detractors, was also the one sport in America where arguments for fair play and meritocracy without regard to race were lodged.

I extensively discuss Peter Jackson's career, more so than anyone else has ever done. I discuss his fights, his skills, and the racial impediments he encounterd.

One thing that comes to light in the book is that the color line is really not as significant in the analysis of Sullivan's career as many might think, for many reasons. First, no black fighter particularly stood out during Sullivan's best years. Second, George Godfrey, the one top American black who stood out, was defeated by Jake Kilrain, who Sullivan fought. Third, Peter Jackson was not a significant contender until the late 1880s. By that time, the Sullivan-Kilrain fight was THE biggest fight to be made in boxing. After Sullivan defeated Kilrain in 1889, he retired, not fighting anyone, white or black, so even though he drew the color line, it didn't matter - he wasn't fighting period. He might as well have drawn the color line against whites. When he finally did fight in 1892, he took on Jim Corbett, who had fought Jackson to a 61 round draw, so Corbett was no less worthy to challenge for the crown at that point than was Jackson.

Oh, and as for your statement that Sullivan was slow, I assure you that you are sorely mistaken. You are thinking of a past his prime Sullivan. In his prime, Sullivan wasn't simply fast, he was extremely fast. Most of the newspapers said that he was the fastest big man they had ever seen, that what made him special was the combination of strength and speed that he had with both hands and feet, such that no man's science could deal with his talent.

- -Much thanks Adam.

You making points I've been making my entire life gives me hope for the future.