BoxRec

ThatOne wrote:

Il Duce wrote:You See Giancarlo,

Mr. Yancey and That One, both post with some wit.........

You sir,,,,

Are, a "Midget Freak in a Circus Sideshow that rides Ferris Wheels by Himself with no clothes on."

If there was a Beer Summit and klompton and i were the slim guys on the far left and far right which one would you and yancey be?

I think you'd be able to recognise them.

One is the son of a Liberace impersonator according to what I have read in this thread. He also has a club foot according to Muhammad Ali.

And the other one will have a white sheet on and ask that you to refer to him as "Grand Wizard".

Giancarlo wrote:

ThatOne wrote:

Il Duce wrote:You See Giancarlo,

Mr. Yancey and That One, both post with some wit.........

You sir,,,,

Are, a "Midget Freak in a Circus Sideshow that rides Ferris Wheels by Himself with no clothes on."

If there was a Beer Summit and klompton and i were the slim guys on the far left and far right which one would you and yancey be?

I think you'd be able to recognise them.

One is the son of a Liberace impersonator according to what I have read in this thread. He also has a club foot according to Muhammad Ali.

And the other one will have a white sheet on and ask that you to refer to him as "Grand Wizard".

Are you suggesting the two would fight over who would not be the black one?

Let's get back to the Liberace lookalike contest that Joe Frazier mentioned your old fella came 3rd in.

Can you post a picture of the medallion?

Why do you keep lying? How stupid do you think we are?


Lie #1 You have no idea what ticket prices were going to be for the Mile High Stadium, or what the seating would have been. It was never announced because that plan was scrapped before the fight was ever signed.

Lie #2 Nobody "knew it was not possible to gross $110,000 at the coliseum." If that were the case why was all of the press quoting that figure up until the day of the fight? why was Milt Wilner quoting that figure up until the day of the fight? Why was a percentage option based on that figure written into the contract based upon the seating and ticket prices for the event AS THEY WERE AT THE COLISEUM?

Lie #3 (or rather probably you just being the idiot you are and missing this fact) You have been arguing all along that the fight did $91,000 (it didnt, you were wrong and cant admit it so youve been desperately trying to cover that fact up). If the fight did $91,000 then by your calculations above that would be a sellout. Yet we know that the fight didnt sell out. This is a fact you admit. In fact 20% of the stadium was empty. In reality the attendance was 9252 of a possible 11400. So lets follow your little formula: 9252 x $8.50 (the actual median ticket price, not $8) = 78642. The actual attendance gate was just over $77,000. So your math supports my argument. BUT there is a problem with using the median ticket price. The median ticket price is not the same as the average ticket cost. The average ticket cost is based on the number of tickets and their cost PER SECTION. The median is simply the mid point between highest and lowest ticket price. The average, which is a more accurate measuring stick, is dependant on knowing how many tickets exactly were sold from each price section. If you dont know that (and I realize you pretend to know that but you dont) then you cant accurately get a fix on the average ticket price. If there were only 1000 seats of a possible 3000 seats sold at $3 then the average ticket price skyrockets and makes your math impossible. This throws the numbers out of whack because regardless of your posturing you dont know what tickets from what sections were sold in the largest numbers. Had the cheap seats sold out and the expensive seats not then the average is thrown way off again along with your calculations. So you are missing a big piece of the puzzle.

However, you have revealed yourself as full of shit with your little equation. By steadfastly sticking to the idea that the coliseum could not do $110,000 you have once again backed yourself into a corner because now you are arguing that the event did $91,000 AND you are also arguing that the event would be a sellout at $91,000. We know it wasnt a sellout so it couldnt have possibly done $91,000. However, we also know it didnt do $91,000 so you are wrong there as well. Youve essentially tried to sit on both sides of the fence just to prove you arent wrong on either point but its impossible to have it both ways. The arguments are mutually exclusive. Next time think your case through a little bit more clearly. But for the time being show me an actual, verified source that refutes Milt Wilner's own words the day before the fight which state that a full house would do $110,000 and that he actually only did just over $77000. You cant. You can argue until you are blue in the face but those facts havent even been realistically challenged by you in any way shape or form.

As usual this argument boils down: Should we believe the actual figures as they were quoted by every outlet? Or should we believe the word of a proven liar who offers up no corraborating material? Pretty simple answer.

Funny why would Milt have his sights set on a conservative $100,000 gate (after he was forced to scale back his numbers due to the collaps of the Moore co-feature)at a venue that according to you could only gross $91,000. And notice how it specifically makes mention of the fact that Wilner had the COLISEUM scaled for a $110,000 house? Thats right. The coliseum, not the mile high stadium.

You are the one who just said a full house would have been $91,000, you are also the one who originally said that the promotion did $91,000 on a house that wasnt full. Dont blame me for using your words against you when you cant get your lies straight. When you can cough up this source from tax records or whatever, do it and I'll gladly post it. Why dance around that. All you have to do is say a name and I will do the rest. The only reason you wouldnt is because you are full of shit.

So basically, from your story, which is just that, a story, I am right. The bout did only $77,000 and change. The idea that the city council reimbursed Wilner (which still is not supported by any factual material) does not change the fact that the gross was only $77,000+ (although Im not stupid enough to realize you are slowly shifting the goal posts under the weight of factual material in order to make it look like you werent lying and still know what you are talking about. My analogy to the banking crisis stands: Saying Wilner's promotion was a success because he had an imaginary golden parachute is akin to saying the banks were successful in 2008 due to the bailout.

As it stands the facts are whats printed above. The rest is just your word which isnt worth nearly as much as the toilet paper I wipe my ass with.

As for your comment about my book: I have no doubt you havent read my book, nor likely Paxton's. Although given your limited research abilities and distate for anything factual I can see why you would enjoy Paxton's rag better than mine. I'll let people who have actual read my book judge for themselves. If they like it great. If not, oh well. BTW, when is your book coming out? No. Hmmm. I guess there isnt much of a market for fairytales these days...

Giancarlo wrote:Let's get back to the Liberace lookalike contest that Joe Frazier mentioned your old fella came 3rd in.

Can you post a picture of the medallion?

Well, both Il Duce and Liberace were short balding men. The latter wore a wig.

Il Duce wrote:That One 'Girl' getting rammed by His new little buddy Giancarlo........

I thought it was your raison d'etre to be talked about in the same breath as one of the world's most flamboyant celebrities.

You must admit Marlo Thomas was quite fetching. I enjoy the company of a pretty woman. Il Duce, I can understand why you wouldn't.

Il Duce wrote:That One 'Girl' getting rammed by His new little buddy Giancarlo........

Please, spare us the audio.

yancey wrote:

Il Duce wrote:That One 'Girl' getting rammed by His new little buddy Giancarlo........

Please, spare us the audio.

I knew you and Il Duce shared many things in common but I would be less than candid if I said I knew you shared the same paraphilias.

If Il Duce is on the left who is his "escort" on the right?

Il Duce wrote:Good Newspaper Finding,

But those numbers were released just after the bout and to the public. What was 'not' released
was what the Denver OED reimbursed Milt Wilner for their part of the deal.

Do you honestly think that the Denver City Council would 'publicly' announce in the Newpapers
that they were reimbursing Milt Wilner, especially that night.

Do you honestly think that the 'connected' Milt Wilner just strolled into Town to lose money.

Have you ever heard of a Town or City getting involved in a 'quiet business deal', to insure an
Event goes on.

For God's Sake Man, you live in Carbondale, Illinois

Illinois Politics...................Honesty is our Best Policy...............

Here you are, a Writer from Southern Illinois, schooling me about 'Honest Numbers'.

Would you believe everything that came out of the Mayor's Office in Chicago......about 'No Kickbacks'

GIVE ME A F***ING BREAK.........

If it wasnt released to the public then how do you know about it? Hmmm? Thats the point. You are pretending you have secret knowledge and you dont. If you did then youd cough it up. You cant. So again, he refused to release these number publicly (although it was the public estimate that you originally quoted which got you into trouble) but then he discloses the actual numbers in public records... Just like your "$91,000 was the take of a house that was only 4/5 full and $91,000 was what a full house would bring" argument this doesnt add up.

No, Wilner didnt stroll into town to lose money. He had an endgame in sight that failed. As I pointed out, and you ran with, Wilner was angling at using this bout as a hook for a heavyweight championship. Hence his willingness to push forward without TV or Radio or a supporting co-main event. The gamble failed and he lost money. No matter how much you pretend to have some fictional inside track wont change that simple fact.

Im sure being from... what is it? New Hampshire? New York? Pennsylvania? Oh well, one of the many locales youve claimed as home... you know all about Illinois politics, particularly southern illinois politics. I know you think you know everything but really...

I say again:




Ive never seen anyone go to such extreme lengths to try to hide the fact that they quoted something incorrectly and didnt really have a great handle on the situation. You realize people would respect you a lot more had you just said "oops, my bad, I read that wrong and jumped to the wrong conclusion." Instead you have concocted one sad, desperate, obvious lie after another in order to what? Keep people thinking you are some sort of expert? I assure you, after being chased from several forums for lying and slander that ship has sailed. It might be time for damage control now, if it isnt already too late. Its going to be hard for anyone to believe anything you say after all of this.

So lets compare Il Douche's stories to see how they have morphed over time:

Originally he said:

Liston-Folley was a monster promotion with over 9200 fans showing up paying out "NEARLY $90,000." Liston, he said, got $25,000 and Folley got $40,000.

An hour later he changed his story:

Liston-Folley did over 9200 fans in an arena that seated 11200 and did OVER $91000. He posted an article to support this which apparently he didnt read because it didnt support this. He adds that he got these figures from the 'City Business Records'

30 minutes later:

Liston-Folley did $91,075 "gross net reciepts" whatever the hell that is, apparently he doesnt know the difference between gross and net. He then laughs at my ascertion that the bout did in fact do $77,406.55 by saying sarcasticly "Yea, sure, Milt Wilner a connected restauranteur would always post accurate receipts for the Tax Records......" So hes clearly saying that Wilner undereported the gate for Tax purposes... yet according to him the gate was officially reported in "City Business Records" as $91,075... So which is it? Did he underreport it to cheat on his taxes or accurately report it?

4 1/2 hours later, after I have corrected him Douche starts using the accurate full house figure of 11400, not the 11200 he had been relying on. Its at this point that Douche introduces his fiction about the Denver City Council bailing out Wilner, after he sees that his arguments about how the gross gate added up to $77,000+ didnt make sense and werent factually accurate:

"See Denver City Council.....who 'contracted' to purchase 'selected' Ringside Gold Seats at 'Premium Prices,
to insure that the Promotion was 'Go-Go Good in Denver'. "

He adds that the Denver Coliseum seats 10,500 and 900 special seats were installed. Notice how up until this point he had been using an inaccurate seating figure but all of a sudden after he is corrected he acts like he knows what hes talking about.

Shortley thereafter when I call him on this he says that the 11,400 seating was just an estimate, not an accurate number... despite this figure being quoted throughout the promotion. I would think they would know how many seats they had and how many tickets they printed...

Douche then hilariously posts a modern seating chart of the Coliseum and uses this to show what seating would have looked like FIFTY THREE YEARS AGO. Kind of like when he said I should refer to Lyle-Shavers to see what seating would have looked like and what a sellout would have done... for a fight 14 years earlier. Anyone here think ticket prices to anything cost the same as they did 14 years ago? No? Didnt think so. Douhce does though.

The following day Douche posts not one but two fictitious articles, without naming a source, whereby Wilner says he did $90,000. He has yet to produce any sources for any of his ascertions. Ive produced several which refute what he says.

Today he tried to say that Liston took $25,000 as opposed to 25% because everyone knew that the gate couldnt do over $100,000. He was wrong though. Liston took 25,000 WITH the privelege of taking 25% (meaning that it was expected to do over $100,000, as stated throughout the promotion, with a full house doing $110,000). Douche's post backfired and actually proved my point, not his. He then backtracked and said this contract stipulation was pointless because everyone knew the gate couldnt exceed $100,000. Anyone who knows anything about these contracts knows they are negotiated endlessly and something like this isnt added for no reason. In this case the contracts were negotiated for an extended period of time. Douche, who is a bit wet behind the ears, doesnt realize this.

Now according to Douche the bout would have done $91,000 had it sold out. It didnt sell out but it still did $91,000. However it did $91,000 because it really only did $77,406.55 but the city council stepped in and essentially gave Wilner money to make the promotion look successful, which of course it wouldnt have been having done only $77,406.55. According to Douche though this was never released to the public. It was kept secret and he is the only person in the world who knows this... except for anyone who can find the ultra top secret "City Business Records" that only a double not spy can gain access to...


See how Douche's story morphs and changes so that he can shift his ignorance of the subject and make it appear that he knew what he was talking about all the time even if he was wrong? Pathetic.

Il Duce, you are attempting to sell us your assumption.

No proof whatsoever, while suggesting that it's "common sense" to assume what you are postulating is true, in the absence of facts. This is how granberry in a more primal sort of way used to attempt to peddle baloney around these parts.

He once assured us that "everyone on the east coast knew". As if the fairy dust of geography somehow provides clarity for all who are blessed to live within certain latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates.

I realize that this is of course true....but unless everyone else knows what YOU and I know....I'm afraid it's very difficult to prove. So like the worlds greatest religions we must simply instruct others to "have faith".

Il Duce wrote:Mr. Box Buzz,

True some facts are impossible to prove........

But 'common sense' is 'common sense'.

The City of Denver owned the Coliseum.........after signing a contract with Milt Wilner
in May 1960, for use - there was a 'clause' that the City would not hold or sponsor
another event on the same day, and agreed to offer adjustments in any competing
event within the City Limits.

Move to baseball {American Association}

By the Mid-Season break, the Denver Bears 'AAA' Baseball Team had the best record
in the American Association, meaning they were awarded the Annual All-Star Game.

The Mile High Stadium was available for Monday - July 18th, and the Denver Bears
{Detroit Tiger affiliation} wanted it.

The Howsman Family who owned the Denver Bears, wanted the All-Star Game and would
not budge. The Denver Bears were a popular drawing team, and routinely pulled in
Crowds between 14,000 to 18,000.

The All-Star game, featured the Associations 'best team' The Denver Bears versus the
a Team comprised of the best players from the other 7-Teams in the League.

Mind you, originally the July 18th Date was open.............

In order the satisfy Milt Wilner, an agreement was reached between the City, County
and Milt Wilner, that they would reimburse the difference between a Full-House
at The Coliseum and whatever the Live Gate Receipts were.

The City Tax Auditors came up with the $91,000 {approx.} 'Gate Receipt' number that night,
after the fight was over.

Actual Gate Receipts may have been $77,700 - but the City kicked in the difference
{$13,500} or thereabouts to Milt Wilner, and a portion of the Lease Fee for the
Coliseum.

Milt Wilner was in a 'No Lose' Deal with the City and County.

I don't think you need to be a Brain Surgeon to understand that.......... do you.......

Proof, you want to see a Copy of the Contract.......

If I post it, will you ban 'Klompton and Crew' for Life.............'Ball is in your Court'

So once again you change your story AND quote sources that you yourself cannot come up with. You say that the city auditors "came up with" $91,000 that night. Not supported by any source. You say it was a big deal for the city to kick back to Wilner. Not supported that they even did it. You know, and I know, that this never happened. You created this fiction out of thin air when you got caught not knowing what you were talking about. I say again: repeating a lie over and over does not make it true. Youve never had any problem posting any sources when you actually had facts to back you up. Youve quoted AP reports, posted links, given exacts times in youtube videos to check, and quoted page numbers of magazines. Yet for some reason you will not give any specifics of this super secret tax record. No link. No actual name. No location where it can be found. Absolutely nothing. Now, if Im making such a big deal about this why wouldnt you just put me in my place and make me look stupid? Embarrass the shit out of me and instantly win the credibility here that nobody is giving you? When the only explanation is that you made it up and cant back it up with any facts you come back with "I dont have to explain anything to you." I call bullshit and given the timeline of your story it should be obvious. You are joke. A sad pathetic little kid playing at knowing what hes talking about and filling in the gaps with fiction that he hopes nobody will check out. When somebody does and calls you on it you get defensive. You get personal. And then the lies start flowing like a waterfall. You ask if you post it will I be banned? Ill never post here again if you give me the actual location where this tax record is so I can get a copy and post it here myself. I would never trust anything you posted. Tell us where we can find this.

Oh now its relax?

What happened to getting me banned forever by posting this great source you have?

Post it or STFU.

Are you going to sit there and tell everybody, that everything in this book is 100% factual. and that you didn't massage a few things to enhance the paragraph's.

Yes, I realize you find that hard to believe. I know it doesnt make sense in your world of making everything up to suit your agenda but its why my book has everything heavily cited with multiple sources. If you think you can find something fictionalized have at it.

And that you didn't read a few other books about the man from other authors, and use literary license.

There have only been two books written about the man prior to me. The first was a highly fictionalized account. You would approve. The second is a poorly researched book which fills in the gaps using stories and quotes from the first book. I had read the first book years before I started writing my own. When Paxton's came out I was done with my research and about 80% finished with my writing, being in the late stages of Greb's life. Neither book was used as source material or anything else, which can easily be seen when you compare my book with the others and see how many stories and facts are untrue and incorrect in both preceding books.

As for literary license. No. You would know all of this if you read my book as you pretend. If you are trying to imply that I borrowed anything from either of those books then, again, I challenge you to find something. In every instance where you will find overlapping accounts (which would be expected when writing about one mans life) you will see that I quote more sources and have more detail. If you are trying to imply that I cribbed from one or the other: Fair's book is paper thin and as stated above mostly fiction. Paxton's book, from the first chapter to the last is 220 pages not including the record or notes. My book from prologue to the final chapter is 633 pages. I have 59 pages of notes. Paxton's has 9 pages of notes. In every instance where we cite sources for the same event I have cited at least as many sources and in the VAST majority of cases I have not only cited MORE sources but I have cited a comprehensive list sources available from the locale. Anyone who wishes to compare the two will note which one is a more comprehensive account. They are priced the same so you can pay $39.95 for filet mignon or you can pay $39.95 for a McDondald's cheeseburger. Your choice.

Im still waiting on your source that is going to blow the lid off my argument and send me packing.

Jesus you are an idiot. The report was obviously a typo. That was Frank Pittman's AP report which was sent out over the wire. Its the same AP report Ive already posted and quoted several times. EVERY SINGLE REPORT UP UNTIL THE NIGHT OF THE FIGHT GAVE THE SEATING AS 11400. Period.

You were so adamant that the coliseum only sat 10,500 and that with floor seating it could only seat 11,400. Remember? You even had your little chart to illustrate that. So why now would you desperately latch onto a typo as proof of anything. Even Milt Wilner, on the night of the fight stated that seating was 11400. You calling Wilner a liar? Its sad that you are so desperate that you will actually criss cross your own arguments and refute yourself in order not to be wrong, yet just end up making yourself look stupid and even more wrong than you already were.

Go back and look up all of Pittsman's wire reports for this from across the country on the date of May 25 and again on fight night and you will see that they confirm the seating as 11400. I have no doubt for the past three days youve been desperately looking for anything that would support your argument and you latch onto an obvious typo. How pathetic. Why not just post this contract and these tax records? You were all game last night. I even offered to never post here again if they supported your claim. Yet for some reason you shy away. Hmmm. suspicious. It almost seems as if you were lying about that and dont in fact have anything to back you up...

klompton wrote:Jesus you are an idiot. The report was obviously a typo. That was Frank Pittman's AP report which was sent out over the wire. Its the same AP report Ive already posted and quoted several times. EVERY SINGLE REPORT UP UNTIL THE NIGHT OF THE FIGHT GAVE THE SEATING AS 11400. Period.

You were so adamant that the coliseum only sat 10,500 and that with floor seating it could only seat 11,400. Remember? You even had your little chart to illustrate that. So why now would you desperately latch onto a typo as proof of anything. Even Milt Wilner, on the night of the fight stated that seating was 11400. You calling Wilner a liar? Its sad that you are so desperate that you will actually criss cross your own arguments and refute yourself in order not to be wrong, yet just end up making yourself look stupid and even more wrong than you already were.

Go back and look up all of Pittsman's wire reports for this from across the country on the date of May 25 and again on fight night and you will see that they confirm the seating as 11400. I have no doubt for the past three days youve been desperately looking for anything that would support your argument and you latch onto an obvious typo. How pathetic. Why not just post this contract and these tax records? You were all game last night. I even offered to never post here again if they supported your claim. Yet for some reason you shy away. Hmmm. suspicious. It almost seems as if you were lying about that and dont in fact have anything to back you up...

Would it be fair to suggest that Il Duce makes so many misstatements that he can no longer keep up with them and ends up contradicting himself?

more than fair.

Frankly it doesnt matter one way or the other. Douche never disputed the seating capacity. That was never at question. The original point as that the bout did $77,000 and change of a possible house of $110,000. Douche has been desperately clinging to the idea that the gate was 90,000 or 91,000 (he cant make up his mind) and that this was the "gross net gate" (never mind that gross and net are two different things. None of Douche's ascertions are supported by any sources. He says he has sources that do support those claims but despite an embarrassing battering he refuses to produce them. Hes threatened to but then when called out he wants everybody to "relax." I know if somebody was verbally kicking my ass all over this forum I would post immediately whatever it took. Especially if that guy offered to volountarily never post here again. Yet Douche, who claims to have these sources, refuses. Instead he wants to build lie after lie to support his argument. I ask again, wouldnt it have just been easier to say "whoops, I misquoted that article." Thats the level of mania you are dealing with here.

What I'm learning from this is the boxers of yore didn't make much money, even controlling for inflation.

Il Duce wrote:For You Steve,,,,,,,,

May 25, 1960 {The Independent Record}

Promoter Milt Wilner's $75,000 Gamble

Zora Folley will receive $40,000 and Sonny Liston $25,000 for the bout to be held at
the Denver Coliseum, with a seating capacity of 14,000.

The $110,000 possible 'Gate Receipts' were based upon a 14,000 Seating Capacity
in the 'original estimate'.

When proper figures of the Seating Arrangement were announced at 11,400 -
the expected Gate Receipt amount was not calculated for. A mistake
that was not corrected at the time.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... WF1NMoSllQ

The article below was taken one month after they signed which was the date of the article you qoute above. So according to you THIS, not your article, is a mistake. Even after you have adamantly argued over several posts that the coliseum cannot seat more than 10,500 or 11,400 with 900 floor seats? See what I mean about you how wiggle back and forth? Once again: You cant argue both sides of the fence.

Give it up Liberace.

Everyone knows you are lying again.

Stick to your insidious racist posts; that way you will at least have Nancey and Nile supporting you.

Il Duce wrote:

Giancarlo wrote:Give it up Liberace.

Everyone knows you are lying again.

Stick to your insidious racist posts; that way you will at least have Nancey and Nile supporting you.

And as usual,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Giancarlo is cuming in the 'rear'..................

There's a whiff of homoeroticism in the ear.