Boxing was most popular in the 1910's/1920's?

I would say little has changed really.

For example; yes you can see Marvin Hagler KO3 Tommy Hearns written down, you can even watch a film of the fight, but you will never get back the amazing buzz of the bout.

The electricity surrounding the seemingly unbeatable Hagler and yet watching Hearns destroy Duran, how could Marvin win? But the hype was so big, surely the fight would flop? And yet when the bell rang for the first round, the fight exceeded all expectations.

But you do not get that same feeling by watching the fight 23 years on....

 

senya13... thanks for the response. I enjoy any banter in refererance to pre-'queensberry rules'. Cheers.

 

Fights For the Championship and Celebrated Prize Battles - or Accounts of All the Prize Battles for the Championship from the Days of Figg and broughton to the Present Day; and Also of Many Other Game and Extraordinary Battles Between First-Rate Pugilists of Ancient and Modern Times
Author: Dowling, Frank Lewis
Publisher: Bell's Life*(1855)

The book is basically a compilation (re-print) of primary sources.

You can look them up in Pugilistica if you want, links to first 2 volumes is in bare-knuckle thread.

 

Cribb - Molineaux II

p. 46.
This match created, if possible, more interest than that which had preceded it, and for 20 miles round the scene of action not a bed was to be obtained for love or money the previous night, unless bespoken days before-hand. By 6 o'clock in the morning hundreds were astir in order to get good places near the stage which had been erected, and by the time the men arrived there were about 20,000 persons present, including many Corinthians of the highest rank.


Oliver - Painter

p. 60
So great was the curiosity excited by the affair, that hundreds of persons left London on purpose to witness it ; and a journey to Norwich in those days was no joke. To give some idea of the appearance of the road, we may mention that at least 1,200 vehicles passed over Cottishall Bridge, on the way to the scene of action. Oliver entered the ring about a quarter before one o'clock, attended by Tom Cribb and Tom Belcher, and was followed at no very long interval by Painter, who was esquired by Tom Spring and Paul. At the time the battle commenced, there were, it was estimated, at least 20,000 persons on the ground.

 

I may be a bit off about my post-1820 remark, I think. I had a general feeling that even championship fights attracted only several thousands, but it seems that's not quite so. Many fights were attended only by relatively small number of "selected" persons so as to avoid the fight being detected by the magistrates.

Browsing through 3rd volume of Pugilistica...

1839-02-12 Bendigo vs Burke
p. 17.
"It was nearly half-past twelve before the actual arrival of Bendigo was made known, and at that time, upon a moderate calculation, there were not less than 15,000 persons present of all degrees, the aristocracy forming no inconsiderable portion."

1845-09-09 Bendigo vs Caunt
p. 28.
"At half-past two a second ring was formed, when there were at least 10,000 persons present."

 

... the wording creates an amazing atmosphere, as it may well have been.. I now take your initial comments as being a 'gospel' report and thank you sincerely for creating some interest regarding this topic. As I type this post, in my hands i hold (in between typing) an original News paper , "Illustrated Times" April 21, 1860 in refereance to Heenan/Sayers... I would be pleased to copy/post this item to you??? The original I shall hold on to. Any particular phrases, observations or descriptions of the fight as penned that may interest you, I will happily list on this site.... the entire fight description if requested..??

 

I have the Bell's Life account of Heenan-Sayers, which was re-printed in Pugilistica, as well as Miles' own comments on the infamous event of cut ropes, The (London) Times' report, re-printed in some newspapers, Wilkes' Times report re-printed in NY Herald, series of articles in Famous Fights Past & Present with lots of insights and quotes from people who were involved in making that fight or attended it (Harry Furniss, the publisher of Famous Fights, attended the fight, and was friendly with Sayers' manager and with Bell's Life editor, so he acquired their recollections about it in private talks or in mail). Allan Lloyd's book on that fight, of course. A hundreds of clippings from US newspapers at the time.
But the more the better, I guess. Based on the name of the newspaper, it must contain drawings, no? It's quite fascinating looking through some illustrated newspapers and magazines from that time, makes it easier to visualize things and life as it had been back then, buildings, fashion, etc.

 

Senya13, the back to back pages of the fight details offer 2 illustrations, 1 of each fighter, although the text is a completely fascinating throw back to the romanticising views that journalists offer to any particular topic in the English text... I will offer some quotes..

"The scene gradually became one of the most intense and brutal excitement. There were shouts to Heenan to keep his antagonist in the sun, to close with him ad smash him, as he had only one arm, whilst the friends of Sayers called to him to take his time..."

What a great insight into the mind set of the time.. Poor Tom had an arm which had been renderred useless, yet, his fans are requesting he 'takes his time'.. The mental images are free to ones self, and its very easy to cunjure up some interesting veiws..

 

So there are only two images?
They were absolutely correct urging him to take his time, he wasn't much hurt or exhausted other than broken arm, while Heenan had one eye closed already and the other closed completely several minutes after the termination of the fight, so if not for interference of the police, Sayers would most probably be the winner, against his blind opponent.

 

senja13, Im pleased to have engaged in text conversation... I believe that Sayers may have been fortunate to have not been "strangled" in the 38th round, as mentioned in the paper, as Heenan held Sayers head over the ropes until his face had turned black. Fortunately the rules appropriated the allowance for 'both referees' to cut the rope..

 

But that is the problem, hindsight is always abused, I think it better just to either see the bout live or read accounts that are not tainted with hindsight; then you get a true opinion not polluted by others biases.

 

Just wanted to ask you look it up, but you mentioned it before I asked. There's a disagreement in sources about what round the ropes were cut in. Bell's Life reported 37th round when it happened and 5 more rounds. While Wilkes' Spirit of the Times and London Times reported it happened in the 38th round and 4 more rounds were fought.

Rule 28 of the Ring Code was put into effect before Sayers-Heenan fight (in 1853) and reads as follows:

28. Where a man shall have his antagonist across the ropes in such a position as to be helpless, and to endanger his life by strangulation or apoplexy, it shall be in the power of the referee to direct the seconds to take their man away, and thus conclude the round ; and that the man or his seconds refusing to obey the direction of the referee shall be deemed the loser.

The articles specified the battle to be under the new rules, as quoted above. So the referee would have finished the round anyhow there and then if it weren't for interference of the police. While cutting the ropes was against the rules, but it had the same result as was dictated by the rules. It was never determined who cut the ropes, exactly, and Heenan would have won the battle only if it had been Sayers' supporters who had done this, but this was never known, so...