Save your money on these biographies

Papke is disqualified from being an all-time great for his horrible thong-wearing and two-tone sun tanning.
Caught on camera for posterity in the 4th Ketchel fight.
Horrendous behaviour.
A punch to the throat would be FAR less offensive.

 

Double Amen!!!:rofl:lol99

 

This content is protected

I know exactly what I wrote. I was saying if I didn't know any better I am not going to respond to that because I've already told you that I am not ManuelorKetcheloranyone else you dream up. :beat No commas I hope that suits you. Your bookwill be a runonsentence trip No ephasis to show that something is a bit separate or distinct

 

He was a good fighter.

 

I saw that it could have been interpreted another way. That's all.

 

No I'm not.

All I can say now is he tried. He tried very hard. If he had gone out with the intention of crushing someone, he would feel home grown wrath. He would know that, that will not only crush the person's spirit, but it has the possibility of having a domino affect. It's not a place for remorse. I know how brutal this place can be. Stanley, to Ketchel was someone who no one seemed to want to remember him well or show regard for his successful but short career, and tragic life. From what I have read, Stanley was tumultuous, but he was soft-hearted in that way too.

I think even though certain ones of the older historians who saw him fight held him in much higher regard than modern day historians. More than anything, it was written for more support for Stanley's honor and memory. It's hard to watch a son's life fade away. It's a disarming task knowing you have to try pieceing together the shards left of a broken spirit due to ill intended deeds of others. But you do what you believe must be done to buoy his reason to survive. I'm pretty sure if Stanley's mother were here she would fight tooth and nail to save his life. No matter the depths it took her to.

 

He definitely is. Georges Carpentier said that Papke gave him the worst thrashing of his career.

Billy could box or slug depending on what was needed. He tried to mix it with the much larger Fireman Jim Flynn and lost badly. Then came back a few months later and outboxed Flynn in a fight that some sources felt that he won(the Los Angeles Times being the most adamant of the fact). He almost closed both of the big man's eyes and had him cut and bleeding.

 

I agree and I don't usually belabor or allow myself to be drawn into endless loop debates. But as you could see from this debate (which I consider to be something of a microcosm) century-old myths die hard. This one is so ingrained in our collective consciousness that for decades nobody even thought to question or look into it. Reminds me of the Greb-Walker street fight myth but to an even larger degree.

One thing that I really hope happens is that someone is able to find the genesis of this myth. I'd really like to know where it was first mentioned in print. I would almost be willing to bet that it was in The Ring magazine, years after the fight itself. Just a hunch.

 

Surf- I think that I first read of the incident where Billy Papke allegedly hit Stanley Ketchel in the throat,instead of shaking hands at the start of their bout in 1908,was in a book I have home, by Nat Fleischer,called
"The Michigan Assassin ". It was published in about 1946. As I will not be home in 3 weeks, I cannot confirm this until I read the book once more..
At any rate I have read this incident several times, from old Ring Mags of
the 30s and 1940s. Strangely this supposedly illegal punch that Papke
supposedly threw was never " challenged", by writers of that era,who
might have seen the bout in 1908, and were around in the 1940s.We shall see...

 

I won't accuse you of being jealous, as someone who has never read a book entirely about Greb, I would like some idea of that book, lt would tide men over until your book is out there. I can understand ten years not being enough time for a complete Greb bio, after all, 299 fights will take some covering. On the Clabby book, I haven't read it, but surely it's the only one on Clabby, and Clabby was a great fighter. Maybe that guy publishing a Clabby book will entice someone with more talent (assuming you are right), do do something more comprehensive, for every Thucydides there are a thousand more who resemble Shakespeare (Willie as historian, surely the worst distorter of historical fact ever, read Richard III and then do some real sleuthing and you'll know what I mean), The Clabby author may not be much of a sleuth but he is the first on the subject who has compiled some information. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I won't comment on the Ketchel book, I have never heard of it until now, but I will say this, a few hours ago you accused me of being two other people and you are doing the same to someone else, it seems to be some kind of habit,..... but as someone who has not posted here in weeks and is very new here I find it alarming that you said that about me, after all, I only pointed out that Les Darcy was a very great fighter, all true boxing historians are Darcy fans, just as they must be Greb fans. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I wish you luck on your book, it will be a massive task as Greb has been the subject of countless myths,.... like the "streetfight" with Walker.

 

I object !!!,... now you are attacking THE Jimmy Clabby, are you for real ??... first you Post these quotes from someone.....

.... then you post this rubbish which is no better,,,,,,,,, you have no right to put the words Jimmy Clabby and sh1t in the same sentence. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have noted today that Clabby, The actual Ketchel and a mention of Les Darcy have raised your hackles,.. and they all happen to be near contemporary Middleweights to your buddy Greb, is there a pattern ??

 

I'm with you on this bloke, I'm a newbie too and he's already accused me of being someone else too, I told him to "stick his head up a dead wombats c***", and all I did was praise Kes Darcy, then he attacks Darcy's worth but shows no sources to back up his McIntosh inspired lies about Darcy. Now here is a dropkick who in just a few hours of meeting me for the first time, I have noticed a pattern, FIRST, Darcy's name riles him, SECOND, Clabbys name riles him and THIRDLY, the mention of Ketchell sends him berserk,...... I'm tempted to go on and say, Mike and Tommy Gibbons and every other great MW, and you get the picture,... all great MW's.... therefore contenders for Greb,.. what's his problem ??..----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- it's true he is right about Greb being great and in need of no nuthugging,....... but I'm sure this boxing historian of boxing historians has read that Jack Kearns said Darcy was the greatest MW to ever live,.. he said it in 1928 and again around 1960...... that evplains him trying to smear Darcy's record (what a F**K*n* NUT),............... He has the gumption to put dung on other posters and to accuse a poster who uses his real name on his avatar all the while hiding behind an ALIAS,,,,,,,,,,,, He's an egotistical DARCY/CLABBY/KETCHEL denier and a Harry Greb worshipper...... he has an axe to grind, but he can get stuffed as far as I'm concerned.

 

It's natural for Greb and Darcy to be compared in scenarios, Just as it's natural to imagine a Ray Robinson Vs Zale fight, or Zale V LaMotta,.... there are common opponents. For any Greb or Darcy fan to think one has no right to be in a ring with the other is the definition of a nuthugger.......... and I hope you aren't calling Darcy a niche fighter....... that would be historically inaccurate, and as thick as a board.

 

I like d spirit here , it can b generalized 2 : save your money .
use d internet 2 get info , if it fails , and it rarely does , then let d wealthy & stupid people 2 have d occasional knowledge advantage over u , not much of a disaster if u ask me .