Joe Jeanette re-enact,clip [acting]

It was funny!

 

...and like I said: You are just an irritating type, so its now wonder we clash.

 

I was refering to the Sugarquoted intro!
And a bit surprised that people who seen the film did not contradict the standard exaggerations.

 

If you need proof other than photos of a bloody swollen and crooked nose (with double bruised eyes, all the textbook look of a guy who had his nose broke) and a raw, bloody maw with no teeth I dont know what to tell you. Sounds like you wont accept any proof. I see why you would be defensive of Marciano seeing as how he is all over your avatar. The whole point of that argument was that Louis, even well past his prime and largely using nothing more than a jab, was able to dish out a significant amount of punishment on Marciano all of which you refuted. Kind of reminds me of when I asked for screen caps of the Langford Hague and Carp Jeannette fights and you suddenly remembered that you gave them away for no reason other than to hide the fact that you had never really seen them... Of course that was after several threads debating the merits of the Carpentier-Jeannette decision, all of which you commented on without ever once mentioning you had supposedly seen the fight YEARS AGO. I guess you just remembered that recently though?

As for the author who supposedly stole my thunder, well, if rushing a book out simply to say you published it qualifies as stealing someones thunder then so be it, but I would rather take my time and publish something that DOESNT have a mistake on nearly every page. Something based on solid historical research and something that I didnt have to prop up with a piece of work which I quote from profusely but then in a later paragraph detail how unreliable it is... that probably does count as great research for you but not for me. Furthermore, what you may call sour grapes could easily be construed as legitimate criticism. Who better to detail the merits of a biography than someone who is intimately familiar with the subject of that biography. The probablem with critical reviews of biographies, particularly in boxing is that they are reviewed by people who have no real knowledge of the subject. This is why we get these myths (such as the 38 knockdowns in McVey-Jeannette) that never die. They are simply repeated and taken at face value.

 

...wait for it, in a minute mcvey will be talking about how the film clearly shows that there 82 knockdowns, not 38, and that every time the fighters took a step blood splashed from the canvas and came down on the audience in torrents. By the end of the fight the audience, fighters, and their cornermen looked as though they had been extras in a Stephen King film...:good

 

This. is. AWESOME.

If there's any fight that should be covered like this , this is the one. Bar none

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxJOy_taioQ[/ame]

youtube.com/eslubin

 

I'm surprised the original film is in colour, it seems too old.
You sure the film hasn't been colourised ?

 

I'm just here to learn things and I value whatever Klompton - or anyone else - has to share.
I was quite prepared to accept that Louis had knocked Rocky's teeth out too, but seeing it was a completely new claim that I hadn't heard or read anywhere else all I wanted was a source. The photo provided was simply not proof. In all the literature and interviews concerning this famous fight no one has mentioned Rocky having his teeth knocked out by Louis. Klompton is the only one, and it appears he bases the claim entirely off of premature conclusions reached from looking at a single photograph.
Fair enough, he is mistaken.
The stubbornness to cling pig-headedly to his initial claims is a little disappointing though. I mean, he knows a lot of interesting factual stuff I'm sure, but anyone takes a credibility knock when they insist on "facts" with such flimsy proof.

Still, it's not life-and-death stuff or anything. Just another day in the classic forum.