Darcy versus SRR

Maybe later, during the weekend. I'm late on several projects at work. Even right now I'm waiting for a phone call about solving one problem remotely.

 

Looking forward to it. :good

 

Klompton

I am not sure if this has been posted yet, or how badly (if at all) it fails the objectivity test, but this article does have a direct first hand quote about the fight from someone who was there.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AAAIBAJ&pg=1366,6448971&dq=darcy+fulton&hl=en

 

Boiler, you've done well to find that, although Unforgiven had posted the same, some pages back.

Have been looking into Mick King's movements over the last week, and it's interesting that he left the country before Darcy, to the United States and then returned to Sydney in July 1917 (for Darcy's funeral) and faced the Police Court House. A 10 quid fine was imposed, Two of his brothers were of fighting in the war. What became of them, I'd like to know??. Oddly enough, he was back on the boat and in the USA almost immediately... still no fingers were pointed.. and no claims of 'slacker' were made. He just continued boxing, as every man should be able to.

 

That's a secondary source. He wants a primary source.

 

How about a quote from Mick Hawkins. Another who was there. Another secondary observation?

"Fred said the news would get around, as it always does, and promoters would be firghtened of matching their boy against Darcy. You have to remember that many people, including good boxers like Chip, had already said Darcy was in a class of his own. But none of the locals had seen him. Now they had, and they got the wind up"

That qoute is taken from D'arcy Niland's accounts, as published by Ruth Park. Had she not died a few weeks ago, I'd ask her for any possble resource. Either way.. it happened.

 

Was that quote printed about the time of the described event (next day to a couple of weeks)? If not, it is not a primary source.

 

The first quote is from nearly a year later and once again its from someone in Darcy's entourage, not an independant source.

Ruth Park admitted in her book, largely based on Nilands work, that they had no primary source for the story.

Like I said, it could have happened but the entire story is unreliable and if it took place we simply have no idea how or why it went down. I have no problem believing they sparred because for a very brief period they were in the same stable. I also wouldnt be surprised if the sparring session ended early. I would be very surprised if it was a cut and dry knockout, and even if it was, it was sparring. The saying goes, you get your licks in sparring so you dont have to get them in a fight. And finally, even if Darcy knocked Fulton down or out, it still doesnt mean he would have gone on to do the same to Greb, Dempsey, Wills, Willard, Levinsky, or even Al McCoy. As stated above you can go through his record and see that plenty of people went the distance with him. Its not like, even at MW (the accepted limit of which he didnt have to make in Australia) he was knockout machine.

 

Well, if there's no 'independant' source, then it mustn't have happened. Mick King, Mick Hawkin's, Jack Dempsey (via his entourage), a long list of books, newsprint from the same year etc. etc. etc FAILS. What about a quote from FULTON stating "It was like being belted from behind". No, I better not bother with that either, as he was not freelance.

Why do you keep crapping on about the M/W limit in Australia? You realise the USA adopted the 160lbs limit in 1915 dont you?

 

I dont know where you get your facts from... The middleweight limit of 160 was NOT formally adopted in the United States in 1915. It was for the most part recognized as being 158 (in fact I have an article complaining that when Darcy agreed to face McCoy for the title he demanded the limit be at 160, the article went on to state that a championship weight should not be arbitrarily dictated by a CHALLENGER above the accepted limit, thats from 1917, two years after your claim). In some odd cases the belt changed hands when a champion was overweight but the challenger won in emphatic fashion and weighed in under the limit. In some other occasions, and this was rare, the title changed hands when both parties were over weight, and once again this usually happened in the case of a devastating victory etc. But the fact is that the pre-dominantly recognized weight limit was 158. And the FIRST HAND SOURCES for that are legion, not the least of which was the fact that by as late as 1923 when Greb signed to fight Wilson the weight was set, and not arbitrarily, at 158. Even Harry Mullen states in his encyclopedia of boxing that the limit was not raised to 160 until 1921 (although that is incorrect) still six years you say and 4 after Darcy died.

Why does it matter? Because, how do you claim a championship that you won from someone who was not a champion, at a weight above the accepted weight limit??? Thats why it matters.

And no, Im sorry, I dont accept the word of a bunch of Australians who have an interest in making their man look like King Kong, after all (or Dempsey for that matter, who wasnt even there and is telling the story second hand at best), you are descended from convicts (especially you Sinn) and as such cannot be trusted.

Wait, so now you have a phony Fred Fulton quote to go along with your phony Fred Fulton photo??? So Fulton went around bragging that he was knocked out by guy that he towered a foot over and outweighed by 60lbs. ??? Youll ****ing believe anything as long as it suits your little fantasy land.

Id love to hear what you have to say about the Mundine boys... Bet they were master boxers that just had tough breaks and were avoided by the best when they were right...

Let me guess, you buy the story that somehow a blow to the jaw dislocated two of Mundines ribs and thats why he quit cold against Briscoe. Or that Monzon landed the perfect punch that ruptered the blood vessels in his eyes causing them to fill up with blood and blinding him, thats why he quit... right?

 

I should add that what you are likely referring to is the Walker Law, which in late 1920 raised the middleweight in NEW YORK STATE to 160. However this was not universally adopted by all states at the time, nor was it even Universally adopted by fighters fighting in the state of New York. As such, as was the case with Wilson-Greb in 1923, fighters could and did maintain the old limits contractually. The MW limit was not raised, and certainly not universally accepted, until Greb and Flowers took the title as both had fought the majority of their bouts above 160 and likely welcomed the extra two pounds added to the limit.

 

Right. So, you obviously realise that 160lbs was a recognised limit in the USA. It may not have covered each state, yet that would have been influence my many different factors, much the same as TEN rounds for the World H/W title had been shaped to suit the increasingly fatigued Jack Dempsey. Anyway, I'll accept Nat Fleichers veiw of the 160lbs limit.

Convict? Be careful.

The testimonies provided prove far and beyond the Darcy/Fulton spar. Ok, Fulton may have been just as useless as Jess Willard, but you just candle handle it.

Why bring the Mundine's into it??

 

No.

 

:roflHoly ****!

 

I recognize that 160 was an accepted weight limit in the United States LONG after Darcy died. Certainly not at any point while he was living. That is the reality of the situation and you seem to be unable to cope with reality when it collides with your little dream world.

So do you deny that you cannot be trusted? I theorize that it has to do with your genetic makeup. You are descended from criminals and as such lying comes naturally to you. Either way youve spun several yarns on this thread alone, illustrating either a gross ignorance of the sport outside of the relatively minor sphere of Australian boxing (and I would argue your ignorance is well illustrated in that small section of study as well) or you simply cant accept when the facts are thrown in your face so you fly in the face of reality and recede into your fantasy world, truly the land of OZ.