When did Bivins "duration" HW title end?

Generally the first Bivins v Mauriello fight in September 1942 is listed as Bivins only fight for the duration HW title. This was in contrast to LHW which had a few duration title fights. But the rematch between the two in March 1943 is apparently also considered a duration title fight(source from boxing rec below). Which begs the question were the Savold and Pastor fights, the 2 HW fights Bivins had in between considered "duration" title fights too? And beyond that what other fights at Bivins reign consist of if there were any? The belts were frozen in 1944.

One way to discern the status of a bout is by the number of planned rounds. But all the fights in question had a distance of 10 rounds.

https://boxrec.com/wiki/index.php/Jimmy_Bivins_vs._Anton_Christoforidis_(3rd_meeting)

 

I never heard of any "duration" title and still don't know what it is. Can you explain?

 

Despite what it says on Boxrec, I don't think the first Bivins-Mauriello fight was ever widely acknowledged as being for the duration title. At the time, Joe Louis was still expecting to defend the actual title against Billy Conn the following month, so there wasn't any need for a duration champion.

After his second win against Mauriello, Bivins was generally recognised as duration champ, but arguably relinquished it by going into the army himself in 1944. At that point, there was an attempt to pitch the third Baksi-Savold fight as being for the title.

 

Its basically an interim title created for WW2 in 1942 in the divisions where the champ was going into the military as it wasn't known how long the war would last. The concept was abandoned sometime in 1944.

Jimmy Bivins held both the HW and LHW duration belts. Lloyd Marshall briefly took over the LHW belt when Bivins also joined the military.

 

The first Bivins v Mauriello fight is the one widely acknowledged as being for the duration title. The second one is the one with flimsy sourcing. I was thinking it might be to clarify the winner of the first fight which was close and had the ref score the fight for Mauriello, the loser. At the same time Pastor had a recent win over Bivins so it'd be logical for their fight to for some sort of title.

Are you sure it wasn't the second Baksi v Savold fight since that one was set for 12 rounds and was earlier in the year? Of course most of these duration fights were 10 rounders but the 12 indicated a special matchup. Reason I'm saying earlier in the year because I thought the reason they stopped the duration title is it became clear WW2 wasn't going to be an extended conflict and the real champs would be back soon enough?

 

Sol, actually the Louis-Conn fight was from a year earlier. Louis' last defense was the rematch with Abe Simon 6 months before the Bivins-Mauriello bout. So it is highly plausible in timeline. There is a blurb on boxrec that says Louis - in uniform - presented Bivins with the Duration belt after the win over Mauriello.

 

That's what people say now, but if you look at reports from the time, no one was calling Bivins-Mauriello I a title bout, or calling Bivins the duration champion afterwards. The second bout actually was described as being for the duration title, though usually in pretty dismissive terms.

https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-call-bivins-mauriello-duration-title/144160731/

It was the third bout that was described as being for the duration title. I think the thing to bear in mind about duration titles in general is that they were little more than a promotional gimmick designed to sustain interest in the sport while the real champion was unavailable. They weren't taken that seriously.

https://www.newspapers.com/image/670943517/?match=1&clipping_id=144161105
https://www.newspapers.com/image/903632134/?match=1&clipping_id=144160965

 

But Louis and Conn were scheduled to fight a rematch in October 1942. The army withdrew permission in a dispute about how much money they would let two serving soldiers make from such an event.

https://www.newspapers.com/image/499662727/?match=1&clipping_id=144161578

 

That's an interesting facet to this story. What's even stranger though is, according to the article, Louis - Conn II was announced September 8th to be contested on October 12th, yet, Louis is there presenting Bivins with the Duration belt on September 15th after his win over Mauriello. The article was dated September 30th and the bout had already been cancelled. So very strange timeline here.

 

Well, that's the question. A natural reading of that blurb on Boxrec is that Louis climbed into the ring after the fight and handed Bivins a belt, but I don't think he was there at all. Certainly it's not mentioned in any contemporary report that I've seen.

He did "crown" Bivins duration champ in August 1943.

https://www.newspapers.com/image/84237216/?match=1&clipping_id=144188676

 

I think you're mixing the 2 up. Bivins getting the duration belt in September is well sourced its any subsequent fights that are not.

As for the Conn fight that doesn't neccessarily contradict this. Having a title fight a month after inaugurating the duration title doesn't change that Louis was leaving and wouldn't be defending the title for years. At this point people are not aware WW2 will be over in less than 3 years.

As per your other examples these were recognized by states. Lee Murray was considered the duration champ by Ohio and Maryland. The fight you're bringing up with Savold and Baksi was recognized by Illinois.

 

You say it's well sourced, but neither you nor anyone else has actually provided a source to back that up. These are the standard AP and UPI reports on the September 1942 fight, neither of which make any mention of a duration title.

https://ibb.co/xGNcw6k
https://ibb.co/k061x2J

I've already shown you one contemporary report describing the March 1943 fight as being for the duration title. Here's a much later article describing his mistreatment late in life which also mentions him winning the duration title in March 1943.

https://www.newspapers.com/image/878369897/?match=1&clipping_id=144219438

 

Made up title designed by the promoter to sell tickets that wasnt widely accepted.

 

Well thats because its commonly referenced in many locations whereas him even fighting for the belt in March 1943 is not nm him winning it that day. Also the source from boxing rec I brought up clearly says Jimmy is set to "defend the duration title". Opposed to "fight for the duration title".

 

Your "source" for the claim that Bivins won the duration title in September 1942 consists of reading it off Boxrec. As I've said, that's contradicted by multiple genuine contemporary sources. I'll post a few more.

October 1942 - Mauriello's fight with Lee Savold is described as "the first step toward crowning a duration champ".

https://ibb.co/whnKYpf

November 1942 - Bivins is described as "the newest and most consistent winner of the contenders for the duration heavyweight title".

https://ibb.co/0Z49srk

December 1942 - The winner of Mauriello-Nova is expected to meet Bivins in "a bout that would have a direct bearing on the much-billed duration heavyweight title".

https://ibb.co/8N936BH

February 1943 - Only his upcoming March 12 fight with Mauriello "separates Bivins from a second duration ring title".

https://ibb.co/gRrDXLS

March 1943 - Bivins "will make a try for the duration heavyweight championship when he meets Tami Mauriello".

https://ibb.co/CJY6nRP

April 1943 - Bivins' recent win over Mauriello "gave him the mythical title of duration heavyweight".

https://ibb.co/yhsZzS3

And so on.