Extra Joe Louis fight?

[evndrbsn]

On Cyber Boxing Zone, it says the following in Joe Louis' record:

1942-1945 Louis joined the Army and toured with the armed forces giving exhibitions
1944
3 Nov Johnny Denson Detroit, MI Exh KO2
6 Nov Charley Crump Baltimore, MD Exh 3
9 Nov Dee Amos Hartford, CT Exh 3
13 Nov Jimmy Bell Washington, DC Exh 3
14 Nov Johnny Davis Buffalo, NY KO 1(0:56)
(Title at risk as per NY Commission Ruling; 6 oz gloves)
15 Nov Dee Amos Elizabeth, NJ Exh 3
17 Nov Dee Amos Camden, NJ Exh 3
24 Nov Dan Merritt Chicago, IL Exh 3

CBZ lists the final career record as 69-3-0, 55 KOs as opposed to the generally accepted 68-3-0, 54 KOs. Just wondering if anyone else knows more about this and whether or not it should be included in his professional record. Also, if it should be included in his record, wouldn't this bring his total defenses to 26 if his title was on the line?

Thanks to anyone who can clear this up.

[Ric]

Was this another example of "local ordinance enforcement" in Buffalo? Earlier, in the 1920s, Buffalo did not allow for exhibitions; bouts had to go to a decision. Thus, the Jimmy Darcy vs. Jack Dempsey bout technically was a title bout:
http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.php/J ... immy_Darcy

Maybe that local Buffalo law was still in effect in the '40s.

[evndrbsn]

Was this another example of "local ordinance enforcement" in Buffalo? Earlier, in the 1920s, Buffalo did not allow for exhibitions; bouts had to go to a decision. Thus, the Jimmy Darcy vs. Jack Dempsey bout technically was a title bout:
http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.php/J ... immy_Darcy

Maybe that local Buffalo law was still in effect in the '40s.

Perhaps this is something worth looking into further. How would we research this particular bout to find out whether or not it was technically official (ie Dempsey-Darcy)? If this was official, it would make Louis' victory the second quickest in heavyweight title fight history (excluding the WBO).

[delisa]

No -- it was exactly the same as the Dempsey bout -- it was not a local commission, it was NYSAC who said the title at risk for Louis, which is why I include it on his record on the CBZ.

Even for Dempsey, there was no local Buffalo Commission -- it was NYSAC itself.

[wouter]

I've put it in

[klompton]

UGGGHHH here we go again. If these EXHIBITIONS are going to go into these fighters official records (which they didnt during their careers for good reason) Then why not have all of Jack Dempsey and Joe Louis (and anyone else for that matter's) exhibitions in New York go onto their permanent record. This is getting ridiculous... Jack Dempsey and Joe Louis both fought plenty of exhibitions in New York state during their career/championship, as did many other champions, its ridiculous to believe some press agents statement that New York had no distinction between exhibition bouts. This is highly HIGHLY questionable IMO.

[delisa]

I agree that it should NOT be in boxrec even though I list it on my site as a valid bout.

That is the difference between the CBZ and Boxrec -- I run a benevolent dictatorship while boxrec is a democracy!

Some day perhaps these specific bouts will be recognized as I beleive they should -- and it is not ALL exhibitions. Only heavyweight champions were subject to the rule and it was a NYSAC rule, not any local commission.


So far as I can tell, only the Dempsey bout and Louis bout was it enorced -- so it is only 2 bouts at issue.

[klompton]

Its symantics. They were exhibition bouts. Especially in the Dempsey fight. Darcy was Dempsey's stablemate and a middleweight. There was no concievable way he could or would have won the fight. Period. Furthermore, I still say that it is highly questionable that the NYAC would have sanctioned or demanded a championship bout between Dempsey and Darcy. NYAC was concerned primarily with bouts that took place in and around New York city. They gained nothing from bouts in places like Rochester, Buffalo, Albany, and other locales. In fact I question how much power the NYAC wielded in such places as all of those places had local boxing commissions or municipalities that oversaw the sport. Remember New York is the place that chased Dempsey-Tunney from the state because of Dempsey's constant refusal to face his top challenger Harry Wills. I find it highly unlikely that they would demand Dempsey defend his title against his middleweight stablemate in a four round bout. Its much more likely that this was a promotional tool by the local matchmaker, promoter, or Kearns, to beef up the gate.

[evndrbsn]

Its symantics. They were exhibition bouts. Especially in the Dempsey fight. Darcy was Dempsey's stablemate and a middleweight. There was no concievable way he could or would have won the fight. Period. Furthermore, I still say that it is highly questionable that the NYAC would have sanctioned or demanded a championship bout between Dempsey and Darcy. NYAC was concerned primarily with bouts that took place in and around New York city. They gained nothing from bouts in places like Rochester, Buffalo, Albany, and other locales. In fact I question how much power the NYAC wielded in such places as all of those places had local boxing commissions or municipalities that oversaw the sport. Remember New York is the place that chased Dempsey-Tunney from the state because of Dempsey's constant refusal to face his top challenger Harry Wills. I find it highly unlikely that they would demand Dempsey defend his title against his middleweight stablemate in a four round bout. Its much more likely that this was a promotional tool by the local matchmaker, promoter, or Kearns, to beef up the gate.

If you are going to argue this, at least get the facts straight. Dempsey DID NOT refuse to face Harry Wills. Tex Rickard did.

[delisa]

The controlling authority -- NYSAC -- in both those case said they were fights and not exhibitions. You can argue they were exhibitions, I have no problem with that, but recognize that they were sancioned as actual bouts. Indeed the Louis fight was suposed to be an exhibition.

There are other anomalies in the records -- Greb's military bouts, for example. How do you consider those. I simply come up with "military bouts." Same with Tunney's bouts in the SOS.

Also the 4-rounders fought by Leonard, Dundee etc. at the inauguration of the Sports Alliance are recognized here as bouts but I would consider them exhibitions. But my opinion counts as law only on the Cyber Boxing Zone.

[delisa]

Another overlooked sequence is the 10 or 12 4-round "no decision" bouts Max Baer had in 1935 prior to the Braddock fight.

Baer used the ND route to get around his contract with the Garden, but the bouts were advertised as bouts and not exhibitions. Baer fought with no headgear and 5 or 6 oz gloves. Many newspapers stated his title was at risk in these bouts if he lost by kayo.

I covered only the Steve Dudas bout in my Braddock book as it was outside the purview of what I was writing about, but I do mention that in that instance (a fund-raiser for Frankie Campbell's widow), the program was explicit that it was a "real" fight.

Here are the fights I have newspaper reports for, there are a few others also:

Max Baer

1934
Dec 6 Johnny Miles Des Moines, IA Exh 4
Dec 28 King Levisnky Chicago, IL Exh KO 2

1935
Jan 4 Babe Hunt Detroit, MI Exh 4
Jan 10 Dick Madden Boston, MA Exh 4
Jan 21 Tony Cancela Miami, Fl Exh 4
Jan 28 Jimmy Malone Miami, FL Exh 4
Feb 16 Stanley Poreda San Francisco, CA Exh
Apr 10 Ed Will Grand Rapids, MI Exh 4
Apr 23 Eddie Simms Cleveland, OH Exh 4
Apr 26 Babe Hunt St. Louis, MO Exh 6

[Caractacus]

bump

[T.M.K]

Hi Gents,

I discussed this many years ago and wrote a piece where I described it as a "secret title defence". It should not officially be included at all, but it is one of those occasions where an italicised sentence is needed, along the lines of "According to the NYSAC ruling of the day, they counted this as defence of the title by Louis, even though no-one else did".

I think it should be *noted*, but not counted

Just my opinion

Thanks

Col :-)

[klompton]

I'll believe it when I see this supposed rule.

For the Dempsey fight I went backwards and forwards through the Walker law and there was no such rule or amendment governing that fight. Several champions fought exhibitions in New York that werent considered title fights by the NYSAC. Its ridiculous for these exhibitions to enter their official record when contemporaries who knew more about these fights and rules didnt consider them defenses and didnt enter them into official records.


IMO all exhibitions should be noted but they should be noted as exhibitions, not actual bouts and especially not title defenses. Thats what wiki's are for not their official records.

[dawudbryant]

I actually emailed the historian Tracy Callis about this and he told me he feels it should be counted as a title defence win. But he told me to email the director of the IBRO Dan Cuoco and ask him. Here is what he said to me.

Joe Louis fought many exhibitions while he was in the service. In the month of November 1944 he fought the following exhibitions as part of a tour around the country.



3 Nov Johnny Denson Detroit, MI Exh KO 2

6 Nov Charley Crump Baltimore, MD Exh 3

9 Nov Dee Amos Hartford, CT Exh 3

13 Nov Jimmy Bell Washington, DC Exh 3

14 Nov Johnny Davis Buffalo, NY Exh KO 1

(Title at risk as per NYSAC Ruling)

15 Nov Dee Amos Elizabeth, NJ Exh 3

17 Nov Dee Amos Camden, NJ Exh 3

24 Nov Dan Merritt Chicago, IL Exh 3



The NYSAC sanctioned his fight against Davis as a world title fight, but no one else took their stance seriously. Accordingly, it has never been listed as a title fight in his official professional record. Several historians such as Tracy Callis and Mike DeLisa believe it should be listed. Personally, I do not consider it an official title fight.

Best regards,

Dan Cuoco

Director,

IBRO




So if nobody took it seriously including the press, does that not indicate that it was seen as being an exhibition and not a title fight?