The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1902-04-13

Kid Broad last Thursday. and his complete
mastery OF the Cleveland fighter when it
came to boxing was the feature Of the con-
test. Although the small ring at the club
gives little room for a boxer to do quick
work in. Attell evaded Broad as readily as
II the men had been fighting In a full-sized
ring, and danced out Of corners in great
shape.
Broad was nearly maddened in the clos
ing rounds by the singing jabs which At
tell sent to his face whenever he got ready.
and by the San Francisco boxers evident
contempt for Broad's efforts to get at him.
In a 24-foot ring Broad's small category
Of hits would have been greatly cut down.
and Attell would have Increased his lead by
just that much.
One thing was evident. however, and that
was that Broad could have finished the
reach his opponent. The few blows that he
landed shook Attell badly; and a very few
in succession would have ended the bout In
the Cleveland boxers favor If he could
have caught Attell mapping for even an in
slant.
Attell fixed it up with Broad in the sew
enth round. and exchanged a few blows in
rapid succession; then he broke away and
did not try to mix things from that time
on. Broad's efforts to get at him in the
closing rounds were fairly pathetic, the
Sesteia AND o Sis y Tas SO s seG much W.iifin In ear,
swings and punches were SO futile.
Once the fight was over. the old question
Of superiority between a boxer and u hitter
arose at once, and the partisans OF each
man had many arguments to advance in IA
ror of the different styles. Those favorfng
the boxers pointed out that Attell simply
played with Broad through the greater part
of the Tight and that Broad's hitting power
was OF absolutely no avail. while those VINO
are advocates Of hitting power insisted that
Atten was not injuring Broad in the slight
est: that the latter could have withstood
Attelfs jabbinr for on indefinite period ana
bout been q nnish contest. when Broad
would have landed the necessary punch.
Both arguments have considerable weight
when based on the performance OF the tWo
fighters. as 1t was evident what Broad could
do II be got the chance. On the other hand,
It would seem that Broad had every oppor-
tunity to land that punch in the twenty
round of the bout. Had the bout been Q
finish light in a r~egulation-sized ring. At
tell would probably have kept away further
then he did in Thursdays battle. and would
have ,aken sven fewer e. chances chance while ,rs,a nroa 20
land his one blow. The bout would then
rave resolved itself into a question Of con-
dition. and Of which man could outwear the
other. rather h into a question OF the
superiority Of the two styles.
The question cannot be settled by constd-
cring the styles of the champions now In
the ring nor by taking the style Of the
most successful pugilists in each division
as come defeat could be brought up in al
most every case 70 neutraiise the argu-
ment. The best summary Of the case was
that given by Austin Rice. which has been
quoted before in these columns, to the ef-
feet that a combination of science and ire
mendous hitting power Is the secret OF
success in the ring to-day: and that unless
a boxer possesses a share Of each attribute.
his chances In the top notch are Indifferent
This may be modified, however. by the
exception Of men who posses one or the
other attribute to an extreme degree. Ire
mendous hitting power. for instance. won
McGovern his championship. while extreme
cleverness won the title for James j. Cor
bett., But each In turn went down before
a fighter of a different style, Corbett sue
cumbing to a hard hitter. while McGovern
was put out by what may be called the mod
ern style of fighter. who possesses both hit
ting power and the science to use 1t prop
erly.
Attell has the exreme clevernessj n At
tells cleverness Is more highly developed,
pro~portionately. than Breads punching.