Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-09-20

at him the contest ended in q draw be-
fore McAuliffe was completely downed. /
might also add that McAuliffe was to some
extent fortunate in escaping defeat at the
hands of Jimmy Carroll But altogether
McAuliffe is by long odds the best American
lightweight there has been. Until he met
McAuliffe Austin Gibbons was an unde-
feated man and as result he was rated
very, very nigh. But, OIL what disap-
pointment. 1 don't remember of ever being
as much disappointed in any man as was in
| Gibbons l have steadily held that he was
an over-rated man, but did not expect that
he was so much over-rated. He is not by
any means in the same class as McAuliffe,
and must have little idea of what he is talk
ing about when he talks of fighting Jem
| Carney or Dick Burge. 1t seems safe to say
that Gibbons defeat of Verral sent his
stock up so high in this country. Let me
say that there are lots of lightweights in
the United States who could make short
work of Verral, and 1 am now inclined to
think that there are several in this country
who would settle Gibbons. A false notion
about the great advantage of his height also
contributed to the high estimation of his
power II a word, let me say that Gibbons
is one Of the clumsiest ightweights that
| have seen; he is one of the worst leaders of;
| has wretched idea of distance and has q
very poor defence. Why, the contrast be-
tween himself and McAuliffe was something
extraordinary.
The Men in the Ring.
When Gibbons and McAuliffe struck an
! attitude for their contest there was an "eyc-
sight of difference in the men. McAulfffe
looked every inch a pugilist, and an exper-
fenced one, while Gibbons, who was ex-
tremely well trained, in many respects gave
evidence of the novice. McAulife wasted
no time, and after a feint or two led off and
landed terrifcally on Gibbons heart He
repeated this two or three times, and then
Gibbons retreated to his corner and under
no consideration would he come out of it.
He was afraid, and that's all there was
| about it Just as soon as McAuliffe led
once or twice successfully and stopped Glib
! bons' counters the latter discovered that he
was wrong. That is my firm conviction,
and most aSsuredlv Gibbons acted like q
man who was afraid. Well, from the time
that the first blow was struck the affair was
one of the most one-sided contests that l
have ever seen. It was simply a question
of McAuliffe walking into Gibbons corner,
leading of and hitting him on the face and
body, Gibbons clinching, and then break.
| That's all there was in it, and that is all
the spectators got for their S. and $40 bills
| The fifth round came, and let nobody say
that in that round Gibbons was not fast
collapsing. He was and he knew it. Why,
when McAuliffe rushed HIM he could no
more defend himself than could child.
The only thing that helped him-I might
say, saved him-was the fact of his being
in his own corner and falling back on the
ropes. This is no exaggeration. And
again when the Captain of police stepped
into the ring McAuliffe had just delivered
blow on Gibbons stomach that doubled
him up, and it is not unlikely that Nc
Aulife would have followed this up and
knocked Gibbons down had there been no
interference. Just as sure as we live Glib
bons would not have lasted the other three
rounds had Captain Hayes not stopped the
slaughter. 1 am aware that the Gibbons
party claim their man was making wait
ing fight To me this is one of the most
amusing contentious. 1 have seen a few
waiting contests, but 1 have never seen a
waiting contest wherein a waiter allowed his
life to be knocked out while he was waiting
The waiting of Gibbons simply consisted in
his waiting until McAuliffe hit him and
then he would clinch or fall Oh the ropea
In waiting" of this kind I'll take the hit
ter every time. Waiting. Boohl Gibbons
was trying his best to hit McAulife and
couldn't, and he couldn't get out of the way
OF McAulitfe's blows.
The Referees Decision.
When the police stopped the very one
sided affair Referee Dunn declared Nc
Auliffe the winner. 1 would have been
surprised had he done anything else and 1
venture to say that any fair minded man
would have done the same thing. Naturally
the Gibbons party objected, declaring that
the fight had to be to finish and that their
man was able to go on with the battle. This
contention at first sight seems reasonable
enough, but there are other facts to consider
1t is true that the articles of agreement
provided for fight to a finish but am IN
formed that it is also true that Just before
the fight Referee Dunn informed the con-
testants that on account ofcertain reports he
had decided to award the victory to the
better fighter if the contest was stopped. The |
subsequent interference by the police fully |
bore out the necessity for Dennis warning |
the contestants, because there is every |
reason to believe that the interference was |
made in the interests of the Gibbons party; |
indeed the Captain of Police asked the |
referee to make it draw, while that very |
Captain subsequently declared that he |
stopped the fight because it was too brutal |
to have McAuliffe punish Gibbons to such an |
extent, Now, what | argue is this, that |
when the referee warned the contestants, as
he did before the fight, and when they |
new condition, the decision was absolutely |
correct and fair. But let us look at the |
other side and we'll see the preposterous in
justice there would have been if the affair |
had been called draw. McAuliffe had his
man beaten beyond the shadow of doubt;
in fact Gibbons was so much beaten that
the fact caused the police to interfere.
Where would the "simple justice" have
been had the referee turned round and said:
''McAulife, you have beaten your man,
but We must divide the money be-
concerned this would have been
much more unfair than giving a beaten man
nothing. But if rule like this were to go;
that is, to make contests of the kind draws
under the circumstances we would have the
veriest pugilistic frauds willing to face the
best of men because the contest would be
stopped and they would get half of the
money. 1t has also been argued that the
referee should have ordered the men to
finish the battle at some other place. The
force of this contention falls to the ground
when we remember that the contest was a
club affair and that more than 1000 people
paid to see it 1 fail to see where the
referee could have ordered the men to if
! Justice were to be given to everybody. The
club was given s., 900 and surely the club
had some right of the disposition of that.
In dealing with this decision of Referee
Dunn l am reminded of decision that John
Angle made few years ago. Nobody can
for a moment dispute the ability and
honesty of Mr.. Angle. He was referee in
the fight between Ted Pritchsrd and Hayes.
The contest was all onesided and Pritchard
was fast knocking his man out when the
contest was stopped. The fight had to be
finish, but Mr.. Angle very wisely awarded
the victory and the money to Pritchard.
Slavin and Sullivan.