Dempsey-Marciano who wins?

[wouter]

Please do

[Marciano Frazier]

Please do

Sure. First, as I understand it, the inventor of Plaster of Paris himself came forth and said that this thing with the bandages could never be done. Some things to note about it; First, Dempsey would have crushed every bone in his hand if he were punching with something hard enough to crush bones through a padded glove on. The Plaster of Paris would have done far more damage to Dempsey's hands than anything else.

You might also notice that Dempsey supposedly dipped his wrapped hands in the Plaster of Paris only moments before getting in the ring and fighting. This is just ridiculous, as the stuff would take a while to harden. In other words, if Dempsey tried this, he'd just be hitting Willard with a big, mushy mess inside his gloves. Plaster of Paris isn't some magic elixir that instantly becomes as hard as a rock and can smash the other guy's bones but leave your hands just fine to punch with.

It would also have been an utterly amazing feat for Dempsey to have somehow had his wraps tampered with and not have it be noticeable at all that his hands were hardened as stone and all. The idea just doesn't work. It's a fairy tale.

[wouter]

He did crush about every single bone in Willard's face, which is pretty hard, if not impossible to do. But what if Dempsey could really punch THAT hard, why didn't he do it to more opponents?
Also, the Dempsey camp had bet Jack's entire purse on Dempsey finishing Willard in the first. Dempsey's hasty exit after the 1st also needs explanation. Maybe something was removed from Jack's gloves between the 1st and 2nd ( the bet was lost anyway after round 1 ) since he couldn't score another knockdown during the rest of the fight.

[Marciano Frazier]

He did crush about every single bone in Willard's face, which is pretty hard, if not impossible to do. But what if Dempsey could really punch THAT hard, why didn't he do it to more opponents?
Also, the Dempsey camp had bet Jack's entire purse on Dempsey finishing Willard in the first. Dempsey's hasty exit after the 1st also needs explanation. Maybe something was removed from Jack's gloves between the 1st and 2nd ( the bet was lost anyway after round 1 ) since he couldn't score another knockdown during the rest of the fight.

"He did crush about every single bone in Willard's face, which is pretty hard, if not impossible to do. But what if Dempsey could really punch THAT hard, why didn't he do it to more opponents?"
A few things need to be taken into account here. You might notice that Willard was 38 years old, hadn't fought in three years, and barely trained for this fight as he was overconfident due to his immense size advantage. This obviously makes him very vulnerable to a young gun like Dempsey.
It's also important to consider that there has scarcely ever been a fighter who was more resiliant than Willard. Willard kept getting up from seven brutal knockdowns and walking right back in there to take more, and he continued to take a somewhat lessened but still intense pummeling in the second and third rounds. So we have an old, rusty, out-of-shape champion who refuses to stay down no matter what but is almost completely helpless against his younger adversary and just taking a vicious pounding.
And then you have to consider Dempsey. Dempsey was 24 years old, in the prime of his life, and was coming off seven straight KO wins, six of them in the first round! It's not impossible to think he might have inflicted more damage on the opponents he was facing prior to Willard as well, had they kept getting up to take more brutal punishment in that same way. I have also heard that Dempsey's KO punch on Fred Fulton, just eight seconds into the fight, broke Fulton's jaw.
And not only was Dempsey a devastating young all-time great in his prime coming off a long streak of crushing blow-outs going against an old, rusty, and out-of-shape, but immensely durable and resilient champion, but Dempsey's entire purse for the fight was riding on a bet of a first-round KO of this fighter, which would add still further to the intensity of Dempsey's devastation. So basically, a large number of factors all came together to produce the single most devastating round of Dempsey's career against a fighter who was not near prepared to fight back against something like that.

"Also, the Dempsey camp had bet Jack's entire purse on Dempsey finishing Willard in the first."
It was a smart bet, considering all the circumstances I listed above. Dempsey was very unlucky not to get the first-round KO, as Willard was down for well over a ten-count at the end of round one, but was saved by the bell

"Dempsey's hasty exit after the 1st also needs explanation. Maybe something was removed from Jack's gloves between the 1st and 2nd ( the bet was lost anyway after round 1 ) since he couldn't score another knockdown during the rest of the fight."
But as far as Dempsey knew, the fight was over. The bell was muffled by a misplacement of one of the ropes, and no one heard it. They thought the fight was over when Dempsey exited the ring. In other words, it would be pretty strange for him to have exited the ring because the bet was lost when as far as he knew, he had won the bet.
Dempsey couldn't score another knockdown for the rest of the fight? Couldn't and didn't are two different things. Dempsey did more boxing through the second and third rounds and wasn't nearly the aggressive wrecking machine he was in round one. He didn't have any reason to be insanely aggressive like that after the first round, because the bet was lost. It didn't make a difference and the fight was already in hand. He continued giving Willard a pounding, but he obviously wasn't going to fight the same way as when he had $10,000+ depending on him scoring a KO that round.

[dempseyfire]

He did crush about every single bone in Willard's face, which is pretty hard, if not impossible to do. But what if Dempsey could really punch THAT hard, why didn't he do it to more opponents?
Also, the Dempsey camp had bet Jack's entire purse on Dempsey finishing Willard in the first. Dempsey's hasty exit after the 1st also needs explanation. Maybe something was removed from Jack's gloves between the 1st and 2nd ( the bet was lost anyway after round 1 ) since he couldn't score another knockdown during the rest of the fight.

The guy has more 1st rd KOs then any HW champion in history. He'd KO'd both 6'4 Fulton and 6'5 Morris in under 20 seconds. The man could punch.

[babulous]

Fights like these is always hard 2 call. There is really no boxing skill envolved it just like a street fight. The outcome really depends on the era, in Dempsey's era he wins by k.o., in Marciano's era he wins by a late tko. But 2 give my honset opinion pound 4 pound, I'd pick Marciano stopping Dempsey, I feel he will land first & his chin will b the essential factor in that fight.

[wouter]

The man could punch.

There's a difference between able to punch and what Dempsey did to Willard that afternoon in Toledo

[Tantum]

There's a difference between able to punch and what Dempsey did to Willard that afternoon in Toledo

Yeah, like objects that don't have any shock absorbance in your gloves.

[Eric the Viking]

There's a difference between able to punch and what Dempsey did to Willard that afternoon in Toledo

Yeah, like objects that don't have any shock absorbance in your gloves.

Yes, they're called "fists." ;)

Seriously, the problem I have with the plaster-of-paris conspiracies is how Dempsey could put a substance like that in his gloves that would allow him to smash his opponent's face but not break all the bones in his own hand while doing so.

Also, as evidence that a human fist can do that kind of damage without artificial aids, consider new L.A. Laker head coach Rudy Tomjanovich. As a basketball player, Rudy T., while trying to break up a fight involving one of his teammates on the Houston Rockets, was on the receiving end of a devastating punch thrown by a player on the opposing team (wouldn't you know, it was the 1977 L.A. Lakers), Kermit Washington.

Here's a brief description from a November 2002 article in the Sporting News, on the 25th anniversary of "the punch:"

" When something told Kermit Washington he was about to be attacked from the rear, he wheeled and threw a punch. In time he would explain the punch as an instinctive reaction to a fear acquired in a schoolyard fight. Never again, he had resolved, would he allow himself to be jumped by an unseen assailant.

What he didn't know, couldn't know, may not have cared to know--for by then he had become an NBA "enforcer" whose unwritten duties included the delivery of punishment for slights against Lakers teammate Kareem Abdul-Jabbar--was that the man running toward him had no intention of fighting.

Rudy Tomjanovich only wanted to break up a fight between a teammate and Washington. He had run some distance to midcourt. Shadowy videotape of the moment shows Tomjanovich raising his hands in self-defense as he sees Washington's punch coming. That, he doesn't remember. He does remember asking the Rockets' trainer: "What happened, Trick, did the scoreboard fall on me?"

Washington's punch, a straight right, had landed square in Tomjanovich's face. A doctor would explain that Tomjanovich's injuries were those of a man who had been thrown through an automobile windshield at 50 mph. Abdul-Jabbar would say the sound of Washington's fist against Tomjanovich's face was that of "melon landing on concrete."

As Tomjanovich lay unconscious, blood spread under his head. Facial bones were broken, his skull displaced. Worse, spinal fluid was leaking into the skull capsule. That night, December 9, 1977, he might have died on a basketball floor."
The real question is: would wearing boxing gloves make it impossible (or tremendously unlikely) for a punch to do that kind of damage? With modern gloves, quite possibly. But the gloves used in Dempsey's era were quite a bit different than the ones used nowadays. Obviously it would still have to have been a perfectly landed punch - but these are world-class boxers we're talking about. Just like Babe Ruth once hit a baseball so perfectly that it flew 600 feet (but that was unique even for Ruth), I don't find it impossible that a legendary puncher like Dempsey really could have landed a perfect shot like that at least once in his career.

[Tantum]

That's not true... You're supposed to be a physics expert... :P

If there was proper thick foamy padding under the plaster, It would absorb the shock from his punch, and the plaster would not cause damage to his hands.

So I do not throw away that theory... The only thing hard about that, is that a ton of officials had to be in on it... And it's amazing that no eye-witness stories leaked out.

Regardless if it was plaster or not... There was something in his glove(s).

We're not talking about one perfectly placed punch, we're talking about broken ribs, broken teeth, broken face, and more... Obviously caused by a hard substance hitting Willards bones.

If the force of Dempseys padded gloves did that much damage, Willard would have been out cold, and he wasn't.

[Marciano Frazier]

That's not true... You're supposed to be a physics expert... :P

If there was proper thick foamy padding under the plaster, It would absorb the shock from his punch, and the plaster would not cause damage to his hands.

So I do not throw away that theory... The only thing hard about that, is that a ton of officials had to be in on it... And it's amazing that no eye-witness stories leaked out.

Regardless if it was plaster or not... There was something in his glove(s).

We're not talking about one perfectly placed punch, we're talking about broken ribs, broken teeth, broken face, and more... Obviously caused by a hard substance hitting Willards bones.

If the force of Dempseys padded gloves did that much damage, Willard would have been out cold, and he wasn't.

Look, the plaster of paris story is BS, plain and simple. First, there were people present at the wrapping of Dempsey's hands who weren't part of Dempsey's camp. Dempsey's wrapped hands would have looked extremely weird if there was a big foam covering in them and they themselves were coated in plaster of paris, but no one said anything like that, and I've even seen a photo of Dempsey before the match in which his hands appear normal for a boxer about to fight.

Dempsey's hands weren't wrapped until a few minutes before the fight. If he had dipped his wrapped hands in plaster of paris, there is NO WAY it would have hardened by the time the fight started. Plaster of paris isn't a miracle substance that can turn hard as a rock in the blink of an eye. If Dempsey had dipped his wrapped hands in plaster of paris, there wouldn't have been more than a few minutes for it to dry, which wouldn't have been nearly enough. He'd be hitting Willard with a mushy mess inside his gloves, not a hard-as-cement bone-crushing substance that would smash his bones to bits. Saying that Dempsey could have done something like that is like suggesting you could try to make a pinata and expect the paper mache to dry in 10 minutes. Those things take hours to harden, and so would Dempsey's plaster of paris.

"Regardless if it was plaster or not... There was something in his glove(s).

We're not talking about one perfectly placed punch, we're talking about broken ribs, broken teeth, broken face, and more... Obviously caused by a hard substance hitting Willards bones.

If the force of Dempseys padded gloves did that much damage, Willard would have been out cold, and he wasn't."
What could Dempsey possibly have used to do something like that? How in the world would he carry some kind of hard object in his gloves(the plaster of paris theory is definitely not true), fight with it, exit the ring, etc. with officials all around and a huge crowd of thousands of people watching, and absolutely no one, not one person present would think or say anything suspicious about the match for years? Willard later claimed that Dempsey had had a metal spike in his glove for the match and had battered him with that, but again, this is just full of holes.

Something like that would have made his punches slower, would have tired his arm out quickly, and would have made his punches all around look very awkward. His gloved fist also probably would have looked strange in that situation. How could he actually fight a boxing match with something like that and not have anyone notice?

The common motivation story for why Dempsey would have done something like this is because of the bet. Doing it to win the bet is the reason most people will say he would have loaded his glove like that. But this is again just ridiculous.

In order to do something like this and actually get away with it, Dempsey would have had to have gone to unbelieveable lengths. He would have had to have bribed a huge number of officials. He would have had to have been literally practicing for weeks on how to throw punches with something like that in his glove, how to make a glove look normal with something like that inside it or how to keep his fist properly clenched all the time so as to conceal it, he probably would have had to exercise his arm intensively just to be able to throw normal punches with an object like that in it and not exhaust it almost immediately, etc.

He and his camp would have had to have invested a huge amount of time and money in figuring out how to rig this just right so that he could do it and get away with it just in order to win a bet that, by all accounts, Dempsey himself didn't even know about until he was in the ring moments before the bell for round one rang. Even in that case, it would be virtually impossible for them to get through all of this totally unaccused and never have any one of the dozens of people who would have to be in on it come forward about it or say something, or even just tell a friend about it while making them "promise" not to tell anyone and have it leak. There would have at least been rumors about it within the next 20 years at some point. But it was never even suggested until decades afterwards when Dempsey's dying manager "came forward" with an exclusive BS story about Dempsey using plaster of paris, and I have already been over and over the fact that it is absolutely impossible for Dempsey to have used plaster of paris in this match.

The only other person to say something about it was Jess Willard, a notorious sore loser who didn't say anything about it and then after Dempsey's manager's story fell through, "came forward" 50 years later to announce he had found a metal spike in the ring the day of the fight and had kept it in a drawer for 50 years, and that Dempsey had been using it to hit him with. This is of course utterly stupid. Why would Willard, who found such a piece of metal the day of the fight and by his own reports realized immediately how he'd been duped, wait fifty years to say anything at all about it when he supposedly had it the whole time?

[Tantum]

What proof do you have that Dempseys hands were wrapped moments before the fight?

[Eric the Viking]

What proof do you have that Dempseys hands were wrapped moments before the fight?

I expect having some neutral people or members of the opponent's camp present while the hands were wrapped is a longstanding practice - but it would be nice to know precisely what standard practice was in Dempsey's day.

But don't let that distract from the fact that in cases tlike this the burden of proof is on the accusers and conspiracy-mongers. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Here we have 2 opposing claims. One, that Dempsey's hands were wrapped in the presence of third-party observers and/or members of the opposing camp shortly befire the fight, which makes perfect sense, is standard practice today and which no boxer's camp could reasonably object to unless they had something to hide. On the other side, we have an intricate foreign-substance-in the gloves conspiracy theory, which like most such theories, requires a long chain of improbably events to all occur:

1) Dempsey's handwraps would have to have been done only in the presence of members of his camp, or tampered with just prior to the fight, without leaving any trace;

2) Dempsey would have had to have some kind of hard substance over his fist, with sufficient padding under it to protect his own hands, but this would have to not increase the size of his wrapped hand sufficiently to be noticeable. At the same time, the hard substance would have to be very light, so as to not slow his punches noticeably. This is complicated enough that there's simply no way to just slip it into the glove on short notice, so the post-wrap tampering is a non-starter. That leaves only the secretive hand-wrap session, which is also extremely implausible. Too many people around before such a big fight, and it makes no sense whatsoever that an obvious ruse like a closed wrap session wouldn't arouse suspicion.

3) No one outside of Dempsey's camp would have been able to see the gloves come off or inspect them or the wrappings after the fight;

4) A whole lot of people would have to keep a very big secret completely to themselves for the rest of their lives. In the real world, people aren't like that. Any one individual can keep a secret, but with multiple people having to be involved, no way does every one of them carry it to his or her grave.

5) Willard had a strong motive to spread and support plaster-of-paris rumors. It's called "being a sore loser."

[Tantum]

Well, It's not necessarily his wrapping, but it could also be the glove itself... There's too many what ifs...

Just because OJ wasn't proven guilty, doesn't mean he's not a murderer...

In the judicial world, you are innocent before proven guilty... In every other walk of life, it depends on the circumstance... And in this circumstance... Dempsey is guilty in my eyes unless proven innocent. (And he never will be)

[dempseyfire]

That's not true... You're supposed to be a physics expert... :P

If there was proper thick foamy padding under the plaster, It would absorb the shock from his punch, and the plaster would not cause damage to his hands.

So I do not throw away that theory... The only thing hard about that, is that a ton of officials had to be in on it... And it's amazing that no eye-witness stories leaked out.

Regardless if it was plaster or not... There was something in his glove(s).

We're not talking about one perfectly placed punch, we're talking about broken ribs, broken teeth, broken face, and more... Obviously caused by a hard substance hitting Willards bones.

If the force of Dempseys padded gloves did that much damage, Willard would have been out cold, and he wasn't.

Have you read write-ups of fights from that period?? With those 6 ounce gloves guys were losing teeth and broken jaws all over the place. It was not uncommon at all.
You can see his hands unwrapped moments before fight in the film. It simply was not possible for him to dip his hads in paster of paris, quickly wrap them without anyone seeing, and then having it harden enough in time for the fight . . . foamy padding in the gloves?? Even if that was possible, it would have to already be inside the glove. The hard stuff would still be touching your fists, and it would certainly damage your hands. It wasn't one punch, it was many many punches. Dempsey hits him flush maybe 2 dozen times. I can think of guys who could break your face if they hit you that often.

[Tantum]

I just watched the fight again... Sure does look like Dempseys hands weigh alot. He's holding his hands like he's got 5lbs on each glove. And swinging the same way.

If you don't see that, you must be exceptionally blind.

[Marciano Frazier]

I just watched the fight again... Sure does look like Dempseys hands weigh alot. He's holding his hands like he's got 5lbs on each glove. And swinging the same way.

If you don't see that, you must be exceptionally blind.

Really? So then literally everyone present at the fight was also exceptionally blind? You're honestly trying to say that not one of the thousands of spectators present at the actual match, who actually saw it all happen and some of whom even saw other Dempsey fights live, ever said anything about the fight being suspicious or about Dempsey's punches looking weird or anything, but 80 years later, you obviously get a much clearer picture of the match with your ancient grainy black-and-white films? Yes, clearly the world was made up of idiots at that time and it would be easy to sneak a huge weight into your gloves before the match, fight with it, get out of the ring with it, be handled by officials and everything, and have this all happen in front of thousands of people all watching it live, but now, 80 years later, it's obvious that everyone back then was exceptionally blind because none of them saw the blatant rouse that you think any moron could see in person.

[Tantum]

It does look like he's got something in his glove(s). The way he's swinging his left... And the way he's holding his hands, like he can barely support them.

[alrightjim]

Before the Hagler-Hearns bout friends were telling me Hagler had never tasted the power of Hearns. But this is the wrong way to look at a fight. What matters is who can take the other guy's best shot and keep throwing his own.

Both Dempsey and Marciano could certainly deliver, although Dempsey came with the hook and Marciano preferred the overhand right. Both were fierce and dirty and hard to discourage.

In this bout Dempsey drops Marciano early with a blistering hook. Marciano gets up. If Marciano is cut, and this is likely, doesn't matter. They never stopped Marciano's fights, even when his nose was split in two,as they surely would have done today. We must assume that this bout was fought in some time anamoly prior to 1955. In this world officials are not squeamish over blood. The fight goes on. Marciano doesn't tire, Dempsey does, Dempsey collapses under a withering fusilade of blows against the ropes, no one punch really doing the job. The fight plays itself out a lot like Marciano's last fight against Moore. You should be asking how Marciano would fair against Tunney. I think Tunney wins that fight.

[crooked nose]

The key here is Rocky's stamina. He'd come at ya all night long, never embarrassed to miss a shot, and actually very hard to hit with a clean shot. Dempsey was raw, a real brawler. Strange as it sounds, I see Rocky outboxing the Mauler, making him miss. Tunney showed how vulnerable Jack was. Marciano by decision or late KO.
By the way, has anyone ever seen how Dempsey fared over 15 rounds? I think he went that distance against Gibbons or Brennan. Did he do well or was he worn out?

[Sweet Scientist]

Things are not always what they appear...(feel free to quote me on that )

Boxing thrives on controversy...and everyone likes a good conspiracy theory...

"Demsey's gloves were full of plaster."

"Liston took a dive in the 'fixed' Ali rematch."

"There was speed in Aaron Pryor's water bottle in the 1st Arguello fight."

"Oswald didn't shoot Kennedy."

All kinds of theories, never any proof...no eye witnesses, no paper trail, no death bed confessions...and, just as many points to argue the opposite point of view...

Have any of you guys who support the 'plaster in the gloves theory' looked at, felt, touched a pair of boxing gloves from 1919? They aren't exactly what they're using today...There were far more incidents of broken bones, permanent injuries & death in the ring back then...couple that with Dempsey's punching power, Willard's age and condition...and draw your own conclusions....

The burden of proof rests with the accuser...there is no proof to be had in the "plaster in the glove" theory...I always heard that this started with a disgruntled member of Dempsey's camp... this is not the most credible evidence...the word of a disgruntled former employee, with other issues nobody even knows about...

Maybe I should have been born in Missouri..."Show me the proof!!"

If you can't...(show proof)...I simply don't believe it.

I do believe that Dempsey was a cut above Marciano...and that Dempsey wins another brutal one...

[elmersalsa]

I think that the Rock was a better fighter than Dempsey. There is no feeeling each other here, both of them will go for the kill a la Bobby Chacon-Ray"Boom Boom" Mancini war for example.

Marciano was one of those fighters that could take a lot punishment. I don't think that Dempsey could have beaten guys of great boxing skills like Jersey Joe Walcott, Ezzard Charles or Archie Moore even though these 3 men were not at their primes, but still were dangerous and hard to beat fighters.

Marciano would have won by TKO in 6. I do not think Dempsey could have took Marciano's best punches.

[Jaclem]

...well..this actually got back on the subject of the thread. i think i'd go with marciano here, on stamina. dempsey was faster but inclined to attack in spurts. marciano just kept coming and actually got stronger as the fight went on. i like professional skills, so i'd watch this on hbo but not on ppv.

can't believe the old "plaster of paris" nonsense is still around. it was jack kearns who started that after he split with dempsey.

a boxing magazine back in the 60s...maybe boxing illustrated...tested this with cleveland williams to see what would happen. it proved to be impossible and the article is too long to quote from memory....but even without this experiment...as well as the many others that had the same result.....the argument has been dismissed in a score of ways. if the plaster made dempsey's fist so heavy, then he couldn't have hit with such speed., and speed is a major factor in making punches damaging. plus, there was no way he...oh the hell with it. too silly to continue. the only thing in dempsey's gloves were his fists and whatever wrapping was allowed at the time.

[alrightjim]

...well..this actually got back on the subject of the thread. i think i'd go with marciano here, on stamina. dempsey was faster but inclined to attack in spurts. marciano just kept coming and actually got stronger as the fight went on. i like professional skills, so i'd watch this on hbo but not on ppv.

can't believe the old "plaster of paris" nonsense is still around. it was jack kearns who started that after he split with dempsey.

Hi Jaclem. Point by Point:

Jaclem: ...well..this actually got back on the subject of the thread.

The subject of any thread on any forum is what the folks posting there collectively determine. Otherwise we are just being pointlessly anal. If moderators strictly enforce the forum remit, so be it, but I tend to think that folks who love boxing are regular folks comfortable with informality.

Jaclem: i like professional skills, so i'd watch this on hbo but not on ppv.

This sounds wonderful, but what does it mean? Like Marciano-Dempsey wouldn't be the fight of any century! Few boxers have had more "professional skills" than Johnny Saxton but a crude slugger like Pipino Cuevas would have taken his head off. Michael Jordan is generally considered the best basketball player to have ever lived, but the man swears he can't spin the ball on his finger. I admire a consummate boxer and a relentless slugger, provided they are getting the job done. The idea is to compete, and win, and use whatever means is necessary to achieve that win, otherwise the competitors aren't really men battling for a prize, just trained monkeys performing on Ed Sullivan for our amusement. It is fun to watch Marciano wear down and defeat Ezaard Charles but it is fun to watch Jimmy Young wear down and drop George Foreman. The skill to achieve these two results, although arrived at from diametric strategies, is "professional." People made similar remarks as you have just before the boxing master Pedlar Palmer came across the pond and got destroyed in a round by Terry McGovern. Professional folks fight for money, for a prize and this is why they are called prizefighters. Any man that defeats another in the ring by any strategy or skill set imaginable, provided the ref doesn;'t penalize or disqualify him to defeat, is a "professional." In fact, the slugging tactics employed by even the most primitive practitioners are far more common to the professional ring than the amateur ranks.

Jaclem: can't believe the old "plaster of paris" nonsense is still around.

Me either. Problem is you can't prove it didn't happen like some other bullshit stories. Example, in baseball the myth is Ty Cobb yelled down to Honus Wagner "I'm coming down on the next pitch, Krauthead!" And he did, and Wagner tagged him out at second and loosened some of Cobb's teeth. This was supposed to have happened in the 1909 World Series. It was easy for a writer at the time to make this up, easy to play to the black hat-white hat rivalry beyween the two. A writer could script a legitmate event to his likening and subsequent generations, pouring over the historical record for posterity, quote this writer and requote the writer, until his scripted lie is documented by layers of good faith research. But Donald Honig went back to the actual boxscores of that game and at no time was Cobb ever at first stealing second when the shortsop was covering the bag. It was all a big lie, and was still presented as fact by Ken Burns in his baseball documentary which postdated Honig's book revealing the hoax, so Burns knew it never happened. It sounded like a truth Burns wanted to believe, so the myth became his truth. Some historian. Hope he never does a documentary on boxing, but if he does, you can bet the Kearns accusation will be presented as fact. There is no boxscore to disprove it. But I am one of those people doesn't believe Reagan got shot, either, and ain't nobody gonna exume the body just to not find a scar on his side. Better to say he did and just let it go at that. Poor Old Dutch can't defend himself anymore anyway. Some historian I'd make.

[Jaclem]

okay, alright.....good points, well written. i wasn't objecting to threads wandering from their beginning point....just commenting on the fact this one got back to it. i do not need a lecture on what this forum is about, as you will learn after you've been here for a while, but thank you for taking the time to do it anyway.

I'm intrigued by your selection of Johnny Saxton as one who displayed high skill levels. He's not one i would have chosen....i don't think he belongs in the elite class of boxers, and he was in more than few "questionable" fights, questionable being the word boxing writers used to avoid law suits. he WAS a pretty good boxer, though, and it's rewarding to find someone here who remembers fighters of that era.

as i am skimpy in my praise of marciano, after i picked him to beat dempsey i couldn't resist the dig....especially when i could get one in on both. seriously, i think someone here made a good point about which era they'd fight in. if it was dempsey's, then i'd say the first one to get knocked down would be the loser, with the 'no nuetral corner" rule not in effect then.

skills...good point...one should go with one's innate ability. foolish for a short stubby guy be a stick and run fighter. short arms make the elbow and head more effective weapons.

you may have a point about reagan not being shot. in a similar vein, i have absolute proof that lincoln wasn't shot either. he died from a veneral disease he contracted from ann rutledge, when they copulated after a rail splitting contest.

again, thank you for your interest in my post.