Corbett - Fitzsimmons Fight /Veriscope(1897)

[Brutu]

Here is a link to youtube that shows whats apparently what is left of the original 100 minute feature film of their fight,
that was filmed on 63 mm film gauge.
Part One
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVwNVzqQeeg

[Brutu]

Part Two

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU_sT_FvyWU

[Brutu]

That replay of the knock out in Part 2 is misleading as it appears too many frames are missing from that part of the apparently only
known surviving print of the Corbett-Fitzsimmons Fight.
Back in the days when it was originally shown at the music halls or theatre ,
it was viewed using a hand cranked camera,and at the moment when the knockdown or knock out occured ,
the audience usually demanded that the projectionist replay that part and the projectionist had to reverse hand crank that part of the film back and this was done over and over again and that is why that part of the film itself became so brittle,
so when Fitzsimmons landed the solar plexus punch,I think the moment is actually missing from this print anyway.
As the one commenter suggested there on youtube ,it looks like it was a liver punch that knocked out Corbett from the print.
Thats what I read somewhere anyway.

[Brutu]

On page 76 of the book FIGHT PICTURES by Dan Streible.
It reprints a newspaper article from that time,where someone illustrated the knock out by tracing over
frames of the film,and you can see a tracing over the frame where Fitzsimmons clearing lands the left hand just under Corbetts
left pectoriol muscle near his heart.

[ben geoghegan]

I have longer footage than this in my possession but without the KO. Now I know why, interesting story. There are two known original prints still in existence, in full. One in a collection in europe. The other was at the MOMA a few years ago.

[Brutu]

There is an enitre chapter about this fight in the book FIGHT PICTURES by Dan Streible.pp52-95.
Im going to have to reread it to possibly find out how many prints were originally struck from the negative back then.
I think the only print they mentioned was a original 63mm Veriscope print in the George Eastman House of International film and photography in Rochester New York .
Possibly as in the cases of other known surviving fight films of the early 1900's,only known prints 16mm reduction prints taken
around 1940's or earlier,such as Jack Johnson vrs Fireman Jim Flynn.
That was the IMOP the weak point of the book.It did list a number of fights that were recorded on film,but did not have a listing l of where all the known surviving original negatives or first prints of the early fights are and how much still actuallyknown to exist.

[Brutu]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7ZXB7Gjw1E

[Brutu]

Anyone know were in or near Carson City Nevada,the exact spot where the actual ring was?
Is there a historical marker there?

[raylawpc]

Anyone know were in or near Carson City Nevada,the exact spot where the actual ring was?
Is there a historical marker there?

At SW corner of E. Musser and N. Harbin Streets in Carson City. There was once a historical marker at the site, but it was removed during construction of a new building at the site in 2008 and has not been returned.

Here are photos (circa 2008) of the marker



and in front of the Sheriff's Office building at which it once sat:

[granberry]

Thanks, Brutu.

[yancey]

I've never been too interested in boxing way back then, but have a question not meant to be smart-assed or rude.

Why did Corbett fight in that getup with part of his butt exposed for all to see? Was that the style back then?

Sorry, but I'd be damned if I would fight in a getup like that.

[jaclem2]

...corbett wears that same near-thong butt-floss in that "fight" film made by edison.

[pound per pound]

I have the 26 minute version of the film, and have studied the knockout in slow motion with freeze frame on my DVD player. Fitzsimmons feints high with one hand to raise Corbett's guard, then lands a sharp downward arching hook punch with the other hand to Corbett's floating rib area.

It was not a heart punch at all.

[Brutu]

Are you sure that there were not any frames missing from the copy of the film you have?
As mentioned earlier they use to re-wind the film back at the original showings in the cinema,so they audience could see the knock-out again
(because there was no such thing as slow mo instant replayswere not invented yet),as a result the film wore and broke with repeated viewings,so frames may be missing of actual knock-out punch landing.

[Brutu]

You have the 26 minute version?
Possibly the condensed version.
Reportly it was 100 minutes long originally.
Including of course footage of town and area,training.

[Adamj1987]

I've never been too interested in boxing way back then, but have a question not meant to be smart-assed or rude.

Why did Corbett fight in that getup with part of his butt exposed for all to see? Was that the style back then?

Sorry, but I'd be damned if I would fight in a getup like that.

yes it was a style of sorts it was them or skin fight britches at that time i think it was left over from the bareknuckle era whn you could grab and that would be easier to grab

[Adamj1987]

I have longer footage than this in my possession but without the KO. Now I know why, interesting story. There are two known original prints still in existence, in full. One in a collection in europe. The other was at the MOMA a few years ago.

i'd love to see the full 1 as i only have the copy brutu linked - thanks brutu

[raylawpc]

I've never been too interested in boxing way back then, but have a question not meant to be smart-assed or rude.

Why did Corbett fight in that getup with part of his butt exposed for all to see? Was that the style back then?

Sorry, but I'd be damned if I would fight in a getup like that.

Corbett was quoted at the time as saying it gave him greater freedom of movement. Remember, too, that women did not attend fights in those day.

Billy Papke wore something similar.

[Ambling Alp]

It was interesting watching that. Had never seen that much of the fight before. What I really wanted to see was when Corbett knocked down Fitz. There has been controversy that it was a slow count and/or the referee should have started the count sooner. It's kind of hard to tell when Fitz actually went down. He sort of slid down.

Another thing I noticed was that Corbett sure looked bigger than 183 pounds.

Too bad there never was a rematch.

[jaclem2]

..there's a story that corbett wanted a rematch and fitzsimmons wouldn't give him one. once encountered one another while walking somewhere and corbett said to fitzsimmons, "if you do not give me a rematch then i shall thrash you the next time i see you." and fitz replied, "...and if you do i shall kill you."

read this a few times over the years but never found any validation, and considering the only parties mentioned are the two of them there is no witness, so one of them would have had to pass it along.

nice little anecdote though, isn't it?

[granberry]

Corbett was afraid to touch Fitzsimmons while Fitz was down.

Fitz grabbed Corbett around the legs while he was down and wouldn't let go.

Corbett raised his arms away to show he wasn't touching Fitz and yelled for the referee, George Siler, to make Fitz let go.

They had had long arguments before the fight about what constituted a foul

and Corbett was demonstrating that he was not touching Fitz while he was down.

The ref, aware that dangerous people had lots of money riding on the fight and that they were in a rough location in the US West,

politely asked Fitz to let go.

Lots of time elapsed--more than ten seconds.

After the fight Corbett immediately claimed that he had been deprived of a win since Fitz was down more than ten seconds.

The pre-fight arguments and the resulting concern about fouling had one disappointing result during the fight.

Neither fighter did anything in close other than clinch--and push off strongly at the end of every clinch

because of concern about being accused of a foul in some way in close.

[ben geoghegan]

It was interesting watching that. Had never seen that much of the fight before. What I really wanted to see was when Corbett knocked down Fitz. There has been controversy that it was a slow count and/or the referee should have started the count sooner. It's kind of hard to tell when Fitz actually went down. He sort of slid down.

Another thing I noticed was that Corbett sure looked bigger than 183 pounds.

Too bad there never was a rematch.

It's essentially a non-controversy. Fitz wasn't badly hurt and not near KO'ed. Corbett wanted the rematch but Fitz was true to his word and never granted it.

[raylawpc]

..there's a story that corbett wanted a rematch and fitzsimmons wouldn't give him one. once encountered one another while walking somewhere and corbett said to fitzsimmons, "if you do not give me a rematch then i shall thrash you the next time i see you." and fitz replied, "...and if you do i shall kill you."

read this a few times over the years but never found any validation, and considering the only parties mentioned are the two of them there is no witness, so one of them would have had to pass it along.

nice little anecdote though, isn't it?

That actually happened and was reported in the press at the time, but the facts were different: The exchange you reference happened in the ring after the fight. After the knockout, Corbett tired to attack Fitz in the ring and had to be restrained. During the melee, the exchange you quoted took place.

Corbett and Fitzsimmons hated one another with a passion. They engaged in a major melee in a New York Hotel at one point. After Jeffries stopped Corbett in 1903, Fitzsimmons, who was in Jeffries corner, began heckling and insulting Corbett, and Corbett went after him. Jeffries was forced to intervene and keep them apart. Can you imagine it?

[raylawpc]

It was interesting watching that. Had never seen that much of the fight before. What I really wanted to see was when Corbett knocked down Fitz. There has been controversy that it was a slow count and/or the referee should have started the count sooner. It's kind of hard to tell when Fitz actually went down. He sort of slid down.

Another thing I noticed was that Corbett sure looked bigger than 183 pounds.

Too bad there never was a rematch.

It's essentially a non-controversy. Fitz wasn't badly hurt and not near KO'ed. Corbett wanted the rematch but Fitz was true to his word and never granted it.

There is an interesting story with that one too: Bill Brady, Corbett's manager, owned rights to the Carson City films. In those days, film projectors were operated with a hand crank. Brady contrived that, when the film reached the point at which Fitz was knocked down, he would tell the projectionist to stop the film and then he'd tell the audience to time with their watches how long Fitzsimmons was down. The projectionist would re-start the projector, but, as prearranged with Brady, he would turn the crank at a slightly slower pace. Brady would then ask the crowd how long Fitz was down and everybody who timed it would agree it was well over 10 seconds. Brady would then lament that Corbett had been cheated by the referee and timekeeper, and deserved a rematch.

He did this little charade at several movie theaters until one night in New York when, unbeknownst to Brady, William Muldoon was in the audience. The burly Muldoon was the official timekeeper for the bout, and had heard what Brady was doing. After Brady did his song-and-dance about how Corbett was screwed by the referee and the timekeeper, Muldoon jumped to his feet, told the crowd that Brady had slowed down the projector, and that Fitz was NOT down more than 10 seconds. Reading between the lines of Brady's autobiographies (in which he worte about this), it seems that Muldoon also told him that if he continued lying to people about the fight, Muldoon would track him down and beat the sh*t out of him. Brady was no dummy - he stopped telling the story.

Fitz was not down more than 10 seconds.

[Brutu]

There is an entire chapter about this fight in the book FIGHT PICTURES by Dan Streible.pp52-95.
Im going to have to reread it to possibly find out how many prints were originally struck from the negative back then.
I think the only print they mentioned was a original 63mm Veriscope print in the George Eastman House of International film and photography in Rochester New York .
Possibly as in the cases of other known surviving fight films of the early 1900's,only known prints 16mm reduction prints taken
around 1940's or earlier,such as Jack Johnson vrs Fireman Jim Flynn.
That was the IMOP the weak point of the book.It did list a number of fights that were recorded on film,but did not have a listing l of where all the known surviving original negatives or first prints of the early fights are and how much still actually known to exist.

Probably the ESPN copy is taken from the only known 63 mm copy at the George Eastman House of InternationalFilm and Photography in Rochester New York.