Darcy Vs Smith II

This content is protected

They met in that momentous. return contest on May 22, 1913, 12,000 people crowding into the Sydney Stadium to see what was widely billed as the middleweight championship of the world.Darcy, at 11.5 1/2, was the lighter by four ounces. There was a grim set to Darcy's jaw that presaged a torrid time for American, and from the opening exchange of hostilities it seemed that Smith would pay dearly for that first unsatisfactory victory.
Smashing through the other's guard Darcy scored with both hands to the head, and then, lightly stepping back a pace, staggered the American as he came in with a terrific short right that just missed the angle of the jaw and landed on the ear. Darcy again led his left, but Smith ducked and shot in a low right uppercut to the body that to all intents and purposes was a replica of the one which so unhappily terminated their first encounter. But there was this vital difference that on this occasion referee Harald Baker saw the incident and severely cautioned the transgressor. Darcy had winced with the pain of the blow, but he quickly recovered, and
rained punches to the head that had the American hanging on desperately. Once Smith drove a hard right to the solar plexus that would have won many a fight, but on Darcy it had no effect, and
even thus early it seemed that only a miracle could save the American from a knock-out But it was not a miracle that saved him.
OUT FOR A FOUL
DARCY battered his man with Iefts and rights in the second term until the harassed American, leaping back, ducked a right and swung his left flush to Darcy's groin. There were few at the ringside who were not convinced that the blow was deliberate foul, designed to save the American from the ignominy of an early
knock-out and when the referee promptly disqualified the offender there was a roar of approval that was taken up in all parts of the house. Neither Darcy nor his corner, it may be stated, had lodged any protest against the blow, the Australian being too keen on a clear-cut victory to want anything of the "win, tie or wrangle" order. As he had once observed, "I want always to win or lose fairly and squarely." But Smith's offence was too palpable to be lightly glossed over, especially coming so soon after a severe caution.
A curious feature of the whole affair was the calmness with which the American and his seconds accepted the referee's decision. . Had they believed themselves genuinely aggrieved, one would have expected some show of excitement. But the only comment offered was a wild remark by Al Lippe that, as Darcy had neither been hurt nor claimed a foul, Harald Baker was somewhat impulsive in taking such a drastic step.

 

The year was 1915.... the computer text often has many typos from Trove.

 

Les DARCY vs Jeff SMITH - The Sydney Morning Herald - 24/May/1915
BOXING.
MIDDLEWEIGHT CHAMPIONSHIP
DARCY BEATS JEFF SMITH
There was scarcely a vacant scat in Baker's Stadium on Saturday night when Les Darcy, of Maitland, encountered Jeff Smith (U.S.) for the world's middle weight championship. Each boxer weighed a few ounces over 11st 5lb. The condition of the men left little to be desired, In the first round Darcy shaped confidently, and aggressively straight left followed by a right swing, left it's mark on Smith's face. The American clinched, and resorted to holding and hitting his opponent The young Maitland blacksmith quite held his
own at infighting. After the breakaway both men exhibited good boxing, their footwork and defensive movements being admirable.
There was a marked difference In the respective styles. Darcy stood well up to his mark, like the boxers of the Jem Mace school. Smith crouched, and, when he landed a blow, came to close quarters, nestled his head near Darcey's chln, and got to work
with one hand while holding his antagonists left or right.
It was while Smith was crouching that he struck Darcy an unmistakably foul blow below the belt. The referee cautioned the American for this offence. The men then finished the round, which
ended in Darcy's favour, but not by a great margin. In the second and last round Darcy forced the fighting and scored with several heavy lefts and rights, mostly to the head. Smith, who was shaping somewhat nervously, was not Idle, for he landed heavily with a straight left the mark. Neatly avoiding Darcy's left lead, he crossed him heavily with the right. Smith ducked another lead, and then swung his left on Darcy's groin.
The referee, without a moment's hesitation, separated the men, and placed his hand on Darcy's head, indicating the winner. Smith went to his corner where he was greeted with prolonged hooting. The decision was undoubtedly correct, and It was loudly applauded.

 

Fool... I just put up two reports, one the first day after the fight the newspaper was at work as they never had a sunday paper. Jeff Smith lost the court thing. Your article you got from me as I was posting these articles within the last fortnight... it wasn't a TKO at all and this very same article explains it. It's hilarious you believe he was TKO'd with a hit to the solar plexus... what Jack Broughton, Jack Slack and Daniel Mendoza called "the mark" when in their second fight Smith lands the exact blow you claim yet Darcy didn't even blink and also the fact Smith was warned for a low blow everyone sees then Smith does a deliberate low blow exactly the same as what Dave Smith claimed happened in the first fight. Now wake up to yourself and stop trying to denigrate Australia'a greatest fighter, you wouldn't be happy until you had his name wiped clean off the record books and until Boxrec lists him as a gym janitor.

 

You are the whiny protected little sod and downright evil for printing lies... you provide no evidence whatsoever and fact is Smith lost the case. Smith wants to carry on like a butthurt child so be it BUT REMEMBER FOOL THIS IS THE SAME SMITH WHO CLAIMS HE BEAT GREB SO YOU CHOOSE... DID SMITH LIE ? IF SO HE BEAT GREB. Now get lost, words fail me well actually I do have many words for your type but only McVey is allowed to say them here without getting banned.

 

For the record... the result is recorded as a DISQUALIFICATION and Darcy won the fight.... end of story.

 

All the papers said so, now do not claim not to know there were two belts at this time because I know you would be aware of that now. It is just as legit as an IBF or WBC or NYBC title.

How long must I have to put up with ninnies.

 

Did you NOTE that Darcy also LOST the fight to Holland by DQ and that it was considered controversial ??? Doesn't look at all like Darcy was protected and given favourable treatment does it. Thanks for the article it helps dispel the myths Klompton is trying to invent.