BoxRec

ok..so

the story of the HWS is the history of Boxing

if we have to go back to the pre sullivan days fine..i have a few questions

can my friends tell me just out of interest ..when were the first belts awarded or were belts always given along with prize money or trophies ?

at what point were 'governing bodies' introduced and for what reasons.....Milling was of course illegal for many years ? Despite ironically being the british national sport

as i understand the british champion was also the world champion in the early bare knuckle days ?

Seems to me Tom Cribb was given a jeweled belt by some wealthy patrons.

rich patrons? i see.

was the belt enscribed with anything? did it have a name? who made it and from what ? What happened to it?

is there anything further on from Cribb?

for example what was the first recorded instance of a dispute over who was the country's best fighter? Who was the first to call someone out ?

did fighters still compile unbeaten records in these days as a way of hyping up matches with other elite fighters ?

funso banjo baby wrote:as i understand the british champion was also the world champion in the early bare knuckle days ?

Only if you happened to be British.

There are two good books on American and British bare knuckle fighting - both well written (although in different styles) and well research. Both are available on Amazon

Bare Fist by Bob Mee: http://www.amazon.com/Bare-Fists-Histor ... 397&sr=1-1

The Manly Art of Self-Defense by Elloitt Gorn: http://www.amazon.com/Manly-Art-Bare-Kn ... gy_b_img_b

i'll take a look.

as to ur comment...are you suggesting then that French or other European boxers were disputing the british world champs ?

When do they not dispute anything british?

funso banjo baby wrote:i'll take a look.

as to ur comment...are you suggesting then that French or other European boxers were disputing the british world champs ?

No. There were no European bare knuckle fighters of note in either the 18th or 19th centuries. The Europeans didn't really care about prizefighting until the gloved era. Bare knuckle fighting was largely an Anglo-American thing.

The Americans considered the British champion to be just that: the British champion. American had its own champion. Thus, the Heenan-Sayer fight to establish a world champion.

havent read books yet ..but...

thanks for info

with regard to the fight u mentioned....

do you know if the winner then called himself the world champion ? or was the concept of a world champion illogical for the reasons stated previously

was this fight then the beginnings of some kind of lineage.

funso banjo baby wrote:havent read books yet ..but...

thanks for info

with regard to the fight u mentioned....

do you know if the winner then called himself the world champion ? or was the concept of a world champion illogical for the reasons stated previously

was this fight then the beginnings of some kind of lineage.

The bout ended in a draw.

cutting to the chase - i think Funso would like to know who the 'lineage' at HW begins with. Illumination and side-details as optional extras.

this is partly true.

but my question is also following on from our discussion about the nature of 'disputed' titles, claims of legitimacy, governing bodies and rankings.

It seems to me that throughout the first 2 thirds of the 20th century the concept of one world champion was rarely ever disputed in the 8 weight divisions. When did this change ? And can the history of 19th century pugilism offer any insights?

Where do the likes of Jack Broughton and James Figg fit in all this?

Both were Heavyweights, and both were great champions.
Could you argue they were the first Heavyweight Champions Of The World?

Jem Mace is considered to be the first Undipsuted Heavyweight Champion Of The World.

Personally, I would give that honour to James Figg.

yiddo14 wrote:Personally, I would give that honour to James Figg.

Why?

The Sayers-Heenan fight ended in a draw. Tom King, then British champ went on to beat Heenan in the next really big international match up. I dont think Heenan was ever crowned American champ was he?

dr_devious wrote:The Sayers-Heenan fight ended in a draw. Tom King, then British champ went on to beat Heenan in the next really big international match up. I dont think Heenan was ever crowned American champ was he?

As I understand it, Heenan claimed the American championship when John Morrissey retired. Morrissey had defeated Heenan in '58, but it had been an exciting and competitive bout and some believed Heenan would have taken Morrissey if only he had not broken his hand early in the fight and had been in better shape for the contest. (Morrissey was in better shape and outlasted Heenan. Morrissey was in great shape, some said the best shape of his career. On the other hand, Heenan apparently took the fight too lightly, believing he would be too young and strong for Morrissey. He came into the ring looking fat. He also had suffered from a nasty sore on his right leg, which hamped his ring agility.)

I think Heenan was generally regarded as the American champion when he fought Sayer in 1860.

Joe Coburn claimed the American championship in 1862 after Heenan refused to fight him.

When Heenan fought Tom King in 1863, he wasn't generally considered the American champion anymore.

In fact, Heenan only had three official fights: the 1858 bout with Morrissey, the 1860 bout with Sayer and the 1863 bout with King.

(I am doing all this from memory, so I apologize for any mistakes.)

funso banjo baby wrote:It seems to me that throughout the first 2 thirds of the 20th century the concept of one world champion was rarely ever disputed in the 8 weight divisions.

It was disputed almost the whole century, there were multiple claimants of the championship all along, US, GB, Australia, sometimes there even were disputes between the US states as to who was entitled to the world championship.

Cribb was presented with a silver cup (80 guineas worth) in December 1811. He was being called the Champion of England. Later he was presented with a belt (before the exhibition with Tom Spring in May 1822).
Molineaux was little known to Americans for a whole, I read that his name wasn't even mentioned in American Fistiana. There is no evidence of him having any previous pugilistic experience in USA, even no mention of such in reports of his first two fights, boxing in the USA started much later than 1810, anyway, so there was really no point to be calling Cribb the champion of the world.

dr_devious wrote:The Sayers-Heenan fight ended in a draw. Tom King, then British champ went on to beat Heenan in the next really big international match up. I dont think Heenan was ever crowned American champ was he?

just picking up this point dr....

hypothetically if The Ring had a ratings system at this time..would things have panned out like this....


Sayers -Heenan draw..... therefore both the World Title AND the NO.1 spot are vacant ..... and Tom King would need to beat both of them to be crowned World champion ?

raylawpc wrote:

yiddo14 wrote:Personally, I would give that honour to James Figg.

Why?

What with him being the "Father Of Boxing" Maybe I'am a little biased.

He was a Heavyweight, a legendary champion at the time, and England was the capital of the fight game(the US didn't even exist as a country when the likes of Figg and Broughton were moulding the sport!)

funso banjo baby wrote:

dr_devious wrote:The Sayers-Heenan fight ended in a draw. Tom King, then British champ went on to beat Heenan in the next really big international match up. I dont think Heenan was ever crowned American champ was he?

just picking up this point dr....

hypothetically if The Ring had a ratings system at this time..would things have panned out like this....


Sayers -Heenan draw..... therefore both the World Title AND the NO.1 spot are vacant ..... and Tom King would need to beat both of them to be crowned World champion ?

Sayers retired after the Heenan bout.

dr_devious wrote:

funso banjo baby wrote:

dr_devious wrote:The Sayers-Heenan fight ended in a draw. Tom King, then British champ went on to beat Heenan in the next really big international match up. I dont think Heenan was ever crowned American champ was he?

just picking up this point dr....

hypothetically if The Ring had a ratings system at this time..would things have panned out like this....


Sayers -Heenan draw..... therefore both the World Title AND the NO.1 spot are vacant ..... and Tom King would need to beat both of them to be crowned World champion ?

Sayers retired after the Heenan bout.

apologies for making u guys do all the work

so...Tom King was the number 1 contender to the World Title after beating Heenan and with sayers retired. Or can we install him as world champ ?

King beat Jem Mace and Heenan in 1863, that gives him as good a claim as any to being world champion imo