Fireman Flynn KO 1 Jack Dempsey

The testimony of his wife under oath, is a tangible piece of evidence whether you like it or not. You say that the evidence is "thin", but that is all that it needs to be, to raise significant doubts about the veracity of the fight. The testimony can be true, without moving any of the known goalposts.

 

In which case we don't know whether any fight ever was fixed or not, all fights ever are null and void

 

but in many, many, cases we don't know whether suspicious fights were fixed. so all of boxing is null and void to you because we don't have a complete and proven list of every fixed fight in history? seems completely illogical to me, think i'll stick with uncertainty and not write off all of boxing history.

 

And all it would and did take for any lawyer to render that testimony useless is to bring into play the character and motivations of that wife. Sorry but an alcoholic, drug addicted pro-stitute motivated by trying to get a payoff and angery over being left high and dry by her ex is hardly anyone to base your case on as was discovered in court.

 

klompton,

I think I've seen you claim that Carpentier-Levinsky was probably fixed, that Tunney-Madden was fixed, you've stated that Moorer took a dive against Foreman.

What exactly is your threshold of evidence ?
Show me what counts as proof for those cases.

 

Sometimes alcoholic drug addicted prostitutes tell the truth.

A testimony taken under oath in no little thing, whatever the character of the witness.

The bottom line is that you cannot validate the outcome of this fight.

There is no film, the witnesses are dead, and the testimony is compatible with the known facts.

 

Yes, we cannot say that any given fight was on the level, as a statement of absolute truth.

If there is no evidence for a fight being fixed, then we can say that there is no reason to think that it was fixed.

Some fights would have been so hard to fix, that we can say that their being on the level is close to absolute truth, for all practical purposes.

When significant evidence for a fight being fixed emerges, then we have to question the veracity of that fight, and that is where we are at here.

 

It's pretty obvious that lots of results that went into the record books were fixed, and we shall never know about them.

 

Scary huh?

 

Well, it all evens out I suppose.
And most fight results are kind of meaningless in the grand scheme of things anyway.

I've said it before, I've seen hundreds of fake ones, apparent dives, weird 'mismatches', dodgy stoppages, corrupt officiating, "strange and funny" endings, bad decisions, curiously lacklustre performances ... live and on TV in my life time .... we all have, and we just accept it as part of the game.
:good

 

I've never slept with one that did.:-(

 

Perhaps you are using the wrong agency!

 

Yes, however her version of the truth even if she wasn't trying to kiss her lovers never regions is hearsay, ie what a woman was told by a man trying to impress her.

Hardly firm evidence is it, except allot of Dempsey fans are the equivalent of a woman being impressed by a man trying to seduce them :yep

 

And you are seduced by any fighter who is not white, is my firm belief. Get over your hatred for you stand alone...Sir, therapy might help you, I think ?