They fought in Detroit in 1941, long after the days when 20 rounds was the norm. So does anyone know why this was scheduled for 20? Joe apparently struggled a bit, or at least as nowhere near his best form, before whacking out Simon in 13 (after knocking him down four times in all), but was there something about Simon or this fight that made for a reason to tack on five more rounds than the usual distance?
I hadn't known the Simon fight was scheduled for 20 rounds, but Joe's 1939 title fight with Bob Pastor was also scheduled for 20 rounds. Never really heard a reason for it, but in a previous 10-rounder Joe outpointed Pastor and did not look particularly good in doing so. I would surmise that the Pastor camp thought that Pastor might have a better chance of victory over the longer distance and the Louis camp probably felt that a longer distance would give Joe more time to stop his man.
I’ve also always been curious why both Dempsey-Tunney title fights were scheduled for 10 (while Dempsey’s win over Sharkey in an eliminator fought between those two meetings was set for 15).
I would guess that back then the amount of rounds was something that could be negotiated. From the research I've done the Louis - Simon fight was the last 20 round title fight.
I've read that Simon's manager insisted on the 20 round length, apparently because Michigan was one of the few states which still allowed bouts of more than 15 rounds and he just thought the novelty would be good box office. Obviously he may have also figured that the extra duration gave his man an advantage, since Simon was very durable and had supposedly never been off his feet. It was a bit of a joke at the time since it was generally felt that Simon would be lucky to go four rounds. He was so lightly regarded that the local commission only recognised the bout as an exhibition.
I believe it had to do with a particular state's regulations for length of boxing matches. New York would not sanction a Dempsey-Tunney fight for the championship because of the Harry Wills situation, so the fight was held in Philadelphia, where the maximum length allowed at that time was 10 rounds. The Dempsey-Sharkey eliminator was held in New York where 15-rounders were permitted.
Odd that NY would not allow Dempsey vs. Tunney but would sanction a title eliminator with Dempsey (that did not involve Wills).
This. At the time only Nevada and Michigan allowed 20 round fights and Johnston insisted on 20 round fights any time his guys fought in Michigan.
It does seem strange - probably the fact that Sharkey had so decisively beaten Wills in October, 1926, effectively eliminating him from the title picture had a lot to do with it.
The LAW was the biggest impediment to boxing. The fighters were willing to fight to the finish, or 45 rounds, 25 rounds, 20 rounds, whatever. They didn't care. But various state regulations limited the maximum number of rounds. So if they said 10 was the max, that was the longest they could do. If they allowed 20, real fighters were happy to do that. And back then, these guys were REAL fighters.
I'm engaging in a bit of hyperbole, but what I mean is there are different levels. Guys back then who fought three or four pro bouts in a month, 10-rounders, some 15 rounders, 20-rounders, against anyone and everyone, sometimes in their first year or two as pros, are a little bit different than guys who are afraid to fight more than 4 or 6 rounds, carefully pick their foes for the first two or three years of their careers, and once they become contenders only fight once or twice a year and not against the breadth and depth of foes that guys in some of these bygone eras did, often not against the best. Ray Robinson and Jake LaMotta fought six times, at one point twice in the same month, and Ray spotted Jake 16 pounds. Today we might be lucky to get the best two guys to fight at all, and it might be several years after their primes. So yeah, they all are real, but there are different levels of real.