English Champions: Daniel Knox

I'll dig for ya bud.

Nothing outside of the clipper or eagle is mentioned in Smith's bibliography. Clipper not even being a thing yet, thanks for saving me the trouble. Which probably means his reference comes from a book, which probably mean their reference came from a paper in the locale so definitely worth looking into. There's some 20 books in his bib, I only have three. I'll check those too, but if we're to find his source probably looking where you told me NY Weekly etc is our best bet.

I'll get on it after working hours. I was looking to edit the Burke-Byrne thread tonight too so might not start until tomorrow, but I will search for it.

 

Consensus of the present? There hasn't been much research done on LPR epoch last 100+ years, we are still going with the lineage offered us by Godfrey, Oxberry, Egab, Jon Bee, Dowlings and Miles. I had to send Mr. Tracy Callis a ton of contemporary clippings on Joe Wormald a couple of years ago to persuade him to return him to English lineage.

This content is protected

I'm not talking about black community or color lines or anything like that. There were some very good sporting writers mid to late 19th and early 20th centuries, who didn't have any color bias, and they rarely mentioned any such titles when talking about top colored fighters of the era. They knew these were mostly used to get more lucrative fights, similar to how state "titles" or city "titles" were used for the same purpose, they didn't have much worth beside that. If you look up NPG write-ups about that 1882 tournament, it was expected that a dozen or so colored fighters would participate, but the necessary $100 deposit eliminated most of them, they were not rich and didn't care to find that money to participate in the tourney. So there were only 4 participants in 1st round and only 2 in several others, if I remember correctly.

This content is protected

We'll just have to disagree on LPR/MoQ. I studied both a lot and I see more difference than similarity between them.

This content is protected

I have both books, "Black Genesis" and "The Sundowners". They are mostly compilation of secondary sources, not the results of primary sources research. When the author had primary sources, he gave the name of the publication and its date if it was newspaper/magazine. He doesn't list any Knox.

Pop open to the back, he's got a bib. Not exactly what you're saying, but it's better than shooting in the dark.

I've quite a lot of "will do in a bit" style work stacking up. Probably for a while I'll just be editing threads. I'll send you a line when I'm done to see what cha think.

 

He's right, let's not battle opines on Dan's thread. We can do that on a thread about the opinions. This thread is about Dan. Fine to say you don't reckon him important, but I'd rather leave it there on this thread and pick it up elsewhere.

Should I do an all inclusive or case by case do yas reckon? Like should George Godfrey-John L duckery be in the same thread as Dan and the colored title's importance or do y'all reckon that would get too muddy?

 

I'm leery of flooding the section with my own bull****. Most people don't give a damn about these threads, they want to talk about fantasy fights. Which is fine, I don't want to bother them by forcing them to skim through my ****.

Right now I have three or four threads popping in and out of the first page. I'll give them time to disappear then before I do another champions series thread I'll start the debate threads and link them all up so the list links to both information and conversation over that information.

 

People enjoy conversation on subjects. They watch their podcasts and talk shows etc. I myself have always had a bit of an issue connecting with people and figuring out what drives them so it is difficult for me to say why people enjoy conversation, but it does seem natural to have them as part of the overall presentation.

Given none of us have any goals toward changing people's minds but rather the spread of information, I think we're the right type to do such a conversation. It's really no pressure on anyone, anyone on the forum can come and say what they like, I just reckon this section is half decent and mature.

@Senya13 If you don't want to speak on subjects or opinionative threads no one would think any less of you, that's quite respectable.

 

Well damn, I was looking through Sundowners for some info on CC Smith. I was getting pretty upset at the lack of when I made my way to the front of the book to see if there's any mention in the preface area of the book.

Nothing on Smith, but I can confirm Kevin's source on Dan's fight was indeed the NY Clipper.

Page 9:
"As early as 1849, when prizefighting was just a whisper in the states, Daniel Knox was being described by the New York Clipper as the "color champion" and was only allowed to fight other black men."

I will try to pull something from the Clipper. Those dates are no so far off that the author couldn't have been there or some such similar. Although, correct me if I'm wrong, but that passage reads like Kevin is claiming the Clipper existed in 49. He doesn't was according to or some such, but maybe I'm putting too much into the words he chose.

Either way, I'll look into it and if you beat me to it, thanks a bunch bud.