Timeline of the Pound for Pound Greatest Fighter.

What about the tournament in 1881?

It is true that the NZ "Championship" was the tournament you referred to, but isnt it equally true that this was billed as a New Zealand champion, and there was no other claimants?

The Slade's brother story is common place, but there is no real evidence to support this. There are a few pretty clear early accounts mentioning the Slade fight, including from Fitzsimmons himself. I think it possible that Fitz Also beat Herbert's brother, and it also likely that Slade would deny such a loss as well. This was not uncommon and not that difficult. For example, last night i read an article about Tom Lees and how his only loss was to Peter Jackson. This is all well and good, except for the fact that it was not his only loss. I think people underestimate the marketing function of the media. The Slade fight was identified by Fitz quite early, but was not really used as a marketing tool. I think this adds to its credibility.

I agree with the most likely weight of Dooley, but i have a vague recollection of him being referred to as a middleweight in those early days, which would place him at at 150-160. I could be wrong though.

By the way senya, do you have any info at all about Slade's younger brother and his career (other than the Fitz fight)?

 

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/15085617?searchTerm=fitzsimmons slade&searchLimits=

From Fitz' own mouth in 1909. I really think we need something a bit more concrete than what you have provided, if we are going to basically call up an all time great with nothing to gain, and basically say he is lying. Also, the articles that you posted dont really seem to match the description of the tournament that Fitz referred to.

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/57590301?searchTerm=fitzsimmons slade&searchLimits=

And that is Fitz in 1909 in a little more detail about the early days. Note particularly his weight at 130lbs. And the fact that the Jem Mace tours were two years approximately apart.

Thanks for the excellent reports though.

 

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/70974702?searchTerm=jem mace&searchLimits=sortby=dateAsc

We know that Mace was a Melbourne Resident in November 1879.


http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/5963582?searchTerm=jem mace&searchLimits=sortby=dateAsc

And we also know that Jem Mace was a guest on the Orient Steamshio, in June 1880, until it set sail (to New Zealand?) Interestingly, his last cbz listed exhibition was in March 1880.

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/43142322?searchTerm=jem mace&searchLimits=sortby=dateAsc

By August, Mace had made a quick visit to South Australia.

All this means that any 1880 tour of NZ had to happen between March 1880 to June 1880 or lat June 1880 to August 1880. Both dates possibly match in with Fiotzsimmons 17 years old comment. Still, the small window of opportunity is not good for the myth. But it is interesrting that Jem's coverage went from large, to virtually non existent, in the Australian papers at the time.

Most of 1881 seems possible as well, but not August 1881, when he was definitely in melbourne when sued for refusing to honour a promise of marriage. It also seems likely that he was looking after his hotel for most of 1881 also.

I think that Fitzys word should be given the benefit of the doubt, but i do admit that there is still some doubt.

 

And to get this back on track, in all seriousness, the non pareil wasnt really as impressive as Sullivan, atl east not in 86. Sullivan had never been tested and dominated every fighter. The non pareil despite some good results drew with Joey Hayes in 1884, and struggled with Jack Fogarty. Still, i would think about the Leblanche win as maybe Lifting Dempsey over the top of Sullivan. I am not so sure that this tops the thrashinf of an old Paddy Ryan and Herald. Higher level of competition admittedly, but he didnt win in as impressive a manner. it is a hard call, what do others think?

 

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cg....1&srpos=85&e=-------100-THD-1-byDA---0mace--

In November 1880, Mace and Family boarded a boat in New Zealand, Timaru. It is possible that there was another Mace In Timaru (though none was mentioned in newspapers) who travelled by boat on this date, but it also seems possible (maybe even likely?) that this was Jem Mace. Do australian papers place him anywhere else at this time, or are they strangely silent about him?

There are very few mentions of boxing in the newspaper at timaru in 1880. This advertisement of Foley v Hicken is one, but note there is no fight report. Remember also that according to CBZ Mace and Foley ran a boxing school together at this time. were they business partners and was Mace involved behind the scenes. Probably not (of course) but it is possible.

It looks bad that the Mace tournament wasnt mentioned, in 1980 in the local papers, but the sport of boxing wasnt mentioned as a whole, including the results of the Australian Champion meeting Larry Foley. It is not likely that a Fitz vs Slade 1980 fight is going to be mentioned, unfortunately.

 

Okay, if we go with the non pareil, is it only 1886 that he takes over from Sullivan or do we say a year earlier?

 

My last post seemed on rereading to indicate Mace Sailing as a fact. I should have noted that the paper read cockburn, Mace and family. I acknowledge that it could be someone else. but this is nt as likely as it would seem. As Mace was not a name (other than Jem) which was really in the papers in NZ around this time period. In fact, i cant recall another making the print other than this one. I acknowledge that the use of the word Family is hard to rationale, did Mace have one at this time especially since he was soon sued by a lady for breach of promise to be married. But still it is also coincidental, that when Fitz claims Mace to have been in Timaru, we have mace not in the Australian press (the year before he was in it every day virtually), and we have him possibly listed in NZ. It is also interesting that Joe Coburn (Cockburn misspelt?) fought Herbert Slade in 1883, so Mace was obviosuly likely to be traveling with this person

You ask why he would go to Timaru with a tour. I ask why not. He was a gypsy originally, and a fight promoter. The way this usually works is to start somewhere and stop off 2 or 300kms down the road, a day or two later and do things again. I imagine he started in christchurch and worked his way down, meeting Fitz in Timaru, or maybe he just travelled to Timaru, who knows. It doesnt seem to have been a long tour if it happened.

Dont get me wrong, you have definitely cast some possible doubt on Fitz story, but nothing has proved it wrong. And this is surprising. If Fitz had claimed 1979 then you would have proved him wrong, but that just doesnt work here. And even if you think he is embellishing himself, why would he want to use Slade and his early fights to do this. By this time that this was written, he had already beaten far more impressive fighters and beating Slade adds little to his legacy. If he was going to make something up, surely it would have resulted in him beating Jem Mace, who was much higher ranked!

Lying about Hall (not that i think Fitz did) is a different story because it does add to his legacy.