New film of Dempsey Sharkey bout

[HOUDINI563]

You are misinterpreting the refs comments. His comment regarding the right hand that hit Sharkeys thigh was an earlier blow. The refs comments regarding the three right uppercuts that just preceded the hook that ended the bout he never wavered. He stated those blows were not low. The ref also stated both men were hitting low. Neither corner or fighter complained of low blows prior to the ko.

Sharkeys comment years later was

“When Dempsey hit you to the body it felt as if his fist was coming out your back”

[HOUDINI563]

If you watch the bout as it wore on Sharkey was in obvious agony over the body blows. You can see him bending way over at the waist trying to avoid being hit to the body. Numerous articles were written afterwards that discussed Sharkeys lack of toughness (yellow streak) and that instead of doing all he could to win he was looking to foul out.

Sharkey gained an early lead but Dempsey was coming on very strong in the last few rounds.

[travestyny]

You are misinterpreting the refs comments. His comment regarding the right hand that hit Sharkeys thigh was an earlier blow. The refs comments regarding the three right uppercuts that just preceded the hook that ended the bout he never wavered. He stated those blows were not low. The ref also stated both men were hitting low. Neither corner or fighter complained of low blows prior to the ko.

Sharkeys comment years later was

“When Dempsey hit you to the body it felt as if his fist was coming out your back”

I don't understand how I'm misinterpreting it when the quotation goes, "I was right on top of the boxers PRECEDING THE KNOCKOUT." They were discussing whether it was a foul or not after seeing the video. See for yourself.

Doesn't make sense for this to be about some other random blow.


And I'm not denying that Dempsey had power, or that it hurt when it was on target. We are talking about whether he was off target here.

[HOUDINI563]

No. That blow he mentions preceded the three right uppercuts. I investigated this bout for months pouring over every quote. The ref is talking about a blow PRIOR to the ko sequence. The ko sequence is very simple...three right uppercuts to the pit of Sharkeys stomach. Watch them yourself..none hit Sharkeys thigh.

[travestyny]

No. That blow he mentions preceded the three right uppercuts. I investigated this bout for months pouring over every quote. The ref is talking about a blow PRIOR to the ko sequence. The ko sequence is very simple...three right uppercuts to the pit of Sharkeys stomach. Watch them yourself..none hit Sharkeys thigh.

Well that's the point. I can't see where any of them landed.

But why would it make sense for that quotation to be about a blow that was not directly before the knockout, when he is discussing what happened PRECEDING THE KNOCKOUT? That makes no sense at all for him to single out a blow that wasn't related to the knockout when discussing if the fight ended because of a foul. Does that make sense to you????


What are you basing that on if the man says himself PRECEDING THE KNOCKOUT. I don't know of another way to interpret "preceding the knockout" other than "right before the knockout."

[HOUDINI563]

I’m telling you the facts. Read the newspapers describing the fight and the refs comments. The ref stated that the three right uppercuts to Sharkeys body were NOT LOW. (Three vicious right uppercuts to the pit of Sharkeys body). Days (perhaps over a week) later he was referencing low blows and the ref used THAT PUNCH as his example. He was not referencing the ko sequence.

[HOUDINI563]

And you can clearly see two of the three right uppercuts to Sharkeys body. Neither are low. The third followed in very rapid succession. You can’t see it but maybe we all can with a slowed down cleaned up brighter film of the one I posted. This is super exciting as the thought always was that the final right uppercut would never be seen. THERE IT IS. LETS TAKE A LOOK!

[travestyny]

I’m telling you the facts. Read the newspapers describing the fight and the refs comments. The ref stated that the three right uppercuts to Sharkeys body were NOT LOW. (Three vicious right uppercuts to the pit of Sharkeys body). Days (perhaps over a week) later he was referencing low blows and the ref used THAT PUNCH as his example. He was not referencing the ko sequence.

I'm not disagreeing with you that he is also quoted as saying they weren't low. But the quotation I'm referencing is from the day after the fight. When the ref says preceding the knockout....that to you means not before the knockout?

Come on, bruh. That makes no sense. We can't just make up what was said when the man, who is talking about whether the fight ended on a foul, discusses what happened right before the knockout. There just simply is no indication that he is referencing some punch that wasn't directly before the knockout. It's confusing because of the different quotations, but clearly the quotation I gave is talking about the blow in question, which would be the blow directly before the knockout blow. There really is no other way to interpret that quotation.

[travestyny]

Ok, check out the Associated Press article that I link to below. There are three opinions given specifically about the blow right before the knockout blow. The first is from Tex Rickard.

"There goes the right. It lands in the pit of the stomach. The blow as I see it is fair. Now the left goes to the jaw. That's the knockout, all very plain."

I'm not sure why the article doesn't make it clear that it's from Rickard, but it's verified that it's him speaking here, where it says he made the statement to a reporter from the Associated Press, which apparently was Alan J. Gould.

Next, the Associated Press article gives a second account of the penultimate blow from Sharkey's manager:

"There it goes. Foul! Dempsey fouls Sharkey twice as plain as day."


And the final quotation in the Associated press article is the one I gave where the referee says the blow travels from the left thigh up.


Why would the article have two quotations about the penultimate blow, and the last quotation about some other blow? Do you see what I'm saying? That wouldn't make sense. Look at the newspaper article yourself.

https://pdfhost.io/v/bjLSpPMb9_0216pdf.pdf

So not only does the referee explicitly state, "preceding the knockout," but it wouldn't make sense for there to be 2 quotations about the penultimate blow, and a final quotation about some other blow used as an example. It makes no sense for this to not be about the penultimate blow, Houdini.

[HOUDINI563]

Again you a misquoting the ref in terms of what he was referencing. The ref NEVER stated at any time the three body blows just prior to the ko blow were low. Never. He was at all times on Dempseys side of the equation. The right hand to the thigh was a blow prior to the ko sequence. Take it to the bank. Again I put many months studying first hand accounts of this bout.