Marciano v Walcott 2 Revisited

That's fine.

I think there's a huge difference between "blowouts" and guys just falling down. Tyson-Marvis Frazier was a blowout. Tyson-Bruce Seldon, no.

But people can believe what they want.

I enjoyed the conversation.

On a side note, I'd recommend to anyone to subscribe to the New York Times online. It's like $20 something a year. But they have scanned every page of every newspaper they've ever printed.

Their search function isn't the greatest. If I typed in Marciano and Walcott 1953, the results can be mixed.

But if you have the dates of fights, you can pull up the entire newspapers in the days leading up to big fights and the days after, you can zoom in and read any article. Each individual article can also be saved as a pdf and printed out.

It's a tremendous resource. They've been covering boxing for more than a 100 years.

You can also see how screwed up boxing has always been. You can see all the fights that were talked about but weren't made.

I don't know how many years it took them to do that, but all newspapers should do that (scan every page they've ever printed) before they fold. I tried to do that with some other papers, but most don't go all the way back or the pages come up like designed web pages, not scans of the actual newspaper pages.

There's just a huge trove of information in them that isn't always searchable by just typing in a few key words.

I just wanted to share that.

Peace.

 

Cool, thanks for that info, in the future even more work will come availible on line. Take books on kindle, a few short years ago nothing that was not current was available now loads is.

I really don't have a beef with anyone who disagrees with me. We are all fans of boxing history here. It is still a shared interest if not a shared viewpoint.:good

 

I will try once more.

I am talking about the motion pictures. Quoting a thousand newspapers from Sept 1952 will tell you nothing about the motion picture profits because the film has to be developed, then edited, then sent to a lab to make prints, with the prints eventually sent to a distributer to be sent to the individual theatres about the country for showing. All this takes weeks and months to get the rentals back.

And the motion picture revenue was just not included as part of the live gate at any time, but it was significant. Walcott got $110,000 total for his share of the movie take of the two Louis fights. It is never mentioned as part of his purse.

here is the 1976 Ring Record Book Entry for the 1952 Walcott-Marciano fight

Attendance--40,379
Official gross receipts--$504,379
Federal tax--$100,929
State tax--$40,373
City tax--$18,167
Official net receipts--$345,197
Walcott's share--$138,070
Marciano's share--$69,085
theatre TV receipts--$125,000
Walcott's share theatre TV--$50,000
Marciano's share theatre TV--$25,000
Walcott's total purse--$188,070
Marciano's total purse--$94,075
*Movie rights not included


*Movie rights not included

Rarely are, but the Ring Encyclopedia also includes Walcott's total earnings for 1952

which included $92,000 for the Charles fight, $10,000 for exhibitions,

and for the Marciano fight

Share of gate receipts---$138,000
Share of theatre receipts--$50,000
Share of Motion pictures--$140,000

for a total of $328,000

making Walcott's total earnings for 1952, $430,000

**nothing in any of these posts convinces me at all that any promoter would shoot himself in the foot financially with both the TV networks and the motion picture rights by having Walcott dump the fight in the first round.

It is simply another bizarre conspiracy theory.

Yes, and I think on this issue the Ring Record Book is as reliable a source as any other.

 

Oh, I agree to disagree, but I do want to make clear what are the facts about the motion picture rights and how that would impact his Walcott being paid to lay down theory.

I think I only posted evidence to support my position.