Abe Attell Q&A

For the old print article bloodhounds & hoarders:

What were contemporary attitudes toward Abe during and after his career,

- among the Jewish community?

- among the gentiles?

- abroad?

ie. Was he universally loved? Hated by some? Respected for his skill but disliked for his personality?

Also, why did the San Franciscan spend so much of his career dusting up on the East Coast?

Finally - is there anything to suggest that there may have been shady dealings with seedy characters during his days in the ring? Of course he was a relic at the tender age of 33 when the Black Sox Scandal went down, but was this an isolated instance of corruption later in life when the purses had dried up or was there a pattern of spotty circumstances dating back to his halcyon days? I'm curious to know just how far back organized corruption in the sport goes. Obviously by 1919, still half a generation from its full-blown notoriety, it had already dug in its hooks into all popular spectator sports and begun the long pickling process of souring the sweet science...but was there any documentation of (even alleged) suspicion of hanky panky at or prior to the turn of the century (barring "genteleman's agreements" between the two participants - again, speaking strictly of organized, third-party corruption)? If there is, it's certainly a foreign subject to me and some enlightenment would be most welcome.

It really would make a big difference if he was 100% on the level as a boxer and just made some bad decisions later in life, as opposed to having a past that's checkered across the board...especially since his greatness is so reliant on his resume without most of us having occasion to see him in action (more on that in a moment).

Did the sports media (not just baseball writers) demonize or defend the old Heeb back when the twenties were starting to roar?


For those more into & knowledgeable about the tape trading & buying scene than me:

What footage, if any, is known to exist? I've read that there might be some but nobody has claimed to have seen it firsthand and certainly it hasn't been made readily available for public consumption.

It seems like all the boxers who conceivably might have been filmed (being popular enough to have been worth the trouble, and active after the medium had become viable) are shrouded in this secretive aura of "maybe". Is there some tight-lipped order of misers sitting on a gold mine of a library, or is it just a matter of such property being difficult to trace over such a long period of time, and especially so with the waning mainstream interest in the sport and its rich tradition?

If there's a positive answer to that first question, btw - the obvious follow-up is...where do I sign up? Who needs my kidney? What does it take? Hook a fellow fight fan up.


Omnibus:

Since nobody would be caught dead making a top 5 list of all-time featherweights without mentioning AA, let alone a top ten - we can safely assume (as with other fighters with either no film or none available) that everybody uses his resume and maybe some colorfully descriptive newspaper write-ups to form their opinion of where he measures up historically. Let's say either or both of the two scenarios played out:

- footage became available, and he really just didn't look that good in a h2h sense. Maybe it was the right style at the time to beat some very good fighters of his era, but based on an assessment of his actual mechanics there's just no way you can see him hanging with at least a dozen other featherweights throughout history, let alone placing in a top 5-10.

- reports were unearthed that some of his bigger legacy-defining wins or title defenses may have been fishy?

...would you be compelled to adjust your rankings? :think


Thanks in advance for not flaking this time, Classic. :good

 

Greg, did you research turn up anything sketchy regarding that particular decision (certainly one that has an impact on Attell's overall placement) or was it just a "difference of opinion", pick-your-style type of thing?

 

An account of the rematch with Kilbane (against whom Attell had successfully defended two years earlier):

So, if his "boasted speed and wonderful cleverness were not in evidence" in this 20-round affair, nor in what should have been a world title defense against Driscoll...my question is: in which of his big fights exactly were his boasted speed and wonderful cleverness in evidence?

Has anybody come across a good comprehensive biography...or has the leg work of culling all the pertinent columns not yet been done?

 

Totally not one of the original aims or focus areas of the thread, but cool.

me too