How about a list of draws from fighters?

[Bronson66]

The cost? You want me to pay for nothing? We've been down this road before. Remember when you said Holmes was kicked out of Alis camp? You supposedly had a source then just to get turned out like a $2 Tijuana hooker. Like I said, you're not here to talk boxing, and you're making it apparent to everyone.

He bet me the Fitz v Ruhlin fight was filmed.it wasn't,the camera refused to work.Later a re-enactment was made with the principals playing themselves ,with Ruhlin wearing heavy stage make up to hide his facial injuries.
It was passed off as the real thing by con man S Lubin who specialised in re-enactments until somebody spotted that Jim Corbett.who had been Ruhlin's chief second was not in his corner in the fake fight.

Corbett had refused to travel back to NY,[the fight was at MSG,]from San Francisco,for the fake fight.
I knew the real fight wasnt filmed because I had Pollack's biography of Fitzsimmons and Gilbert Odd's too,plus Steve Compton author and fight film collector confirmed it.
Z then said Ted Spoon had confirmed the fight was filmed,I contacted Ted who stated he had said no such thing and gave me his permission to quote him to that effect ,which I did.
Then Z changed tack and said ,because the fight was re-enacted that counted as the real fight being filmed,and refused to honour the bet.That is the kind of person we are dealing with here..


"The Fitzsimmons v Ruhlin Fight Was Not Filmed!
The fight film was shown to enthusiastic audiences through-out America,and in England until someone spotted the fraud by pointing out the absence of Jim Corbett from Ruhlin's corner."




www.imdb.com · title · tt0302719Life Motion Photographs of the Fitzsimmons and Ruhlin Fight ...
"No copy of the original fight was ever made, due to technical difficulties with the cinematography. The public were initially fooled until it was spotted that Ruhlin's chief second Jim Corbett was not in his corner"

[Willie Pep 229]

He bet me the Fitz v Ruhlin fight was filmed.it wasn't,the camera refused to work.Later a re-enactment was made with the principals playing themselves ,with Ruhlin wearing heavy stage make up to hide his facial injuries.
It was passed of as the real thing by con man Lublin whospecialised i nre-enactments until somebody spotted that Jim Corbett.who had been Ruhlin's chief second was not in his corner in the fake fight.

Corbett had refused to travel back to NY,[the fight was at MSG,]from San Francisco,for the fake fight.
I knew the real fight wasnt filmed because I had Pollack's biography of Fitzsimmons and Gilbert Odd's too,plus Steve Compton author and fight film collector confirmed it.
Z then said Ted Spoon had confirmed the fight was filmed,I contacted Ted who stated he had said no such thing and gave me his permission to quote him to that effect ,which did.
Then Z changed tack and said ,because the fight was re-enacted that counted as the real fight being filmed,and refused to honour the bet.That is the kind of person we are dealing with here..

Don't call Lubin a conman. That was Edison's rhetoric. Lubin advertised his fights as reenactments. Of course that early on no one understood what "reenactment" meant, and most thought they were watching a real fight.

From ChatGPT

Siegmund Lubin, an early film pioneer and competitor of Edison, was accused of forging a film of the Fitzsimmons-Ruhlin fight. However, it appears that Lubin never explicitly marketed it as a genuine film of the actual fight—only Edison’s camp accused him of deception.

Lubin, known for producing reenactments and duplicates of famous fights, released his own version of the Fitzsimmons-Ruhlin fight, likely using actors or staged sequences. Though Edison’s company criticized Lubin, there is no strong evidence that Lubin falsely claimed it was the actual fight.

DIGRESSION

In the early nickelodeon days they (both Edison and Lubin) use to sell the fights/reenactments on a pay-by-round bases. With any round containing a knock down or KO, costing double.

P.S. The historical quotes above show the power of Edison's rhetoric and his ability to tear down an opponent, e.g Westinghouse, and 'write' history to his liking.

[Bundana]

Bundana has an absolute command over boxing trivia... and I use the word trivia with the caveat it is misleading... I would rather say statistical information. I have only seen one other poster on the same level, forgot his name. I really respect such a skill, and the ability to make a multidimensional list: two skills I profess to not be very able at!

Thanks a lot... you're too kind!

Now the real king of boxing trivia is of course Henry Hascup - who's probably the guy, you had in mind?

[Bronson66]

Thanks a lot... you're too kind!

Now the real king of boxing trivia is of course Henry Hascup - who's probably the guy, you had in mind?

I remember him on ESB good Guy!

[Marchegiano]

Do youse lot not know how the newspaper stuff is properly navigated either?



I feel like Bundy asked a very similar question but got a bunch of personal choice responses and absolutely nothing that explains when historians see a newspaper source as an official result and when it's an unofficial newspaper result

[Marchegiano]

Is the interpretation of the result perhaps reliant on the individual historian?

I dunno ... is this rhetorical? Are you telling me it is or genuinely asking me?




For what it's worth boxrec has this:

Official boxer record:

Term used by the Association of Boxing Commissions, which dictates that "Official Boxer Records" be based solely upon the official commission results of the host state.





Which is all well and good for eras with well regulated commissions and bodies but for the most part we're dealing with times when champs can be striped by bodies and no one cares let alone anything official. Like if we go official body records then Sam Langford is a world champion by some french boxing union. JJ is stripped by the EBU. etc. Stuff Boxrec themselves does not recognize as "official"


​If I presented myself as someone who knows, my bad, both times I've been questioned I did mean to appear as someone who doesn't, because I don't. I've always just accepted what is and worked around it, this is me questioning it.

[Willie Pep 229]

I've seen an old Lubin advert for the fake fight,it's advertised as the real thing.Of course that may not be down to Lubin, and I may be unjust in calling him a con man ,I make my share of mistakes,and I'm happy to be corrected But that is his reputation whether inspired by Edison I don't know .

Lubin used both Ruhlin and Fitz for the re-enactment,Gus' face was covered in heavy stage make-up to disguise his injuries.


Lubin was several times guilty of infringement of copyright.So let us say he ,"sailed close to the wind,"and leave it at that.lol

N.B.No primary sources posted by Z so far!

You may not be wrong.

It was a vicious time for copyright infringement.

I just don't like giving Edison the benefit of the doubt. He was such a prick and hurt many people.

But, also at the very least I feel confident that Lubin made little effort to clarify the situation to the audience. As you pointed out, and I agree, most thought it was the real fight.

But how many people today thought Spinal Tap was a real band?

[Willie Pep 229]

Oh,I'm quite prepared to be wrong ,and I know nothing about Edison's character,he may indeed be the ,"villain of the piece,"

God, it is one of those things where when you do learn of him, you find yourself asking "Why was I told this guy was a great man?"

He was like Elon Musk today. Not actually an innovator but had a brilliance for taking new technology and exploiting it.

Like Musk, a self promoter out the as-s.

But also like Musk, not a people person. Often took credit for others work and would rather hold back innovation than see another be successful.

Edison tried to shut down the entire verging film industry by claiming a patten on "sprocket holes" and then refusing to share, even for profit.

It took the courts to overrule his nonsense.

[Marchegiano]

I'm offering a possible explanation nothing more.

Got you

Yes, it does seem like a pick and choose kind of situation. I may be reaching for something that doesn't exist but I sure would like to believe there's some criteria for this.






"world" but it really means whites of the US + BE recognized by most people based solely on opinion paired with absolutely no criteria and backed by records that are likewise only sometimes kept records due to newspaper verdicts while other newspaper verdicts are fine to be the sole source for a recorded fight.


Quality history keeping that.

[QueensburyRules]

Thanks a lot... you're too kind!

Now the real king of boxing trivia is of course Henry Hascup - who's probably the guy, you had in mind?

- - Went plenty of rounds with Henry in the Historical Heavyweight Sticky and it was always a pleasure. I believe a rare savant would an apt description...