The Washington times., 1909-02-12

reforms suggested by the Sporting Life,
of London, and, according to cable dis
patches, has done away with the fool
ish system OF having men weigh in at
the ringside.
There never was any necessity Tor men
making weight just before entering the
ring, and not infrequentIy a boxer start
ed 10 fight without the proper stamina
because ne had been drying out TO the
last minute TO save his forfeit In such
cases a man is likely TO be severely in
Jured by a blow which ordinarily would
not feaZe him, and all true lovers Of the
sport VIII be glad 20 see that so infiuen-
tial an organization as the National
Sporting Club has taken a firm stand
against it,
Important Subject
The subject CT weights is an important
one, and the sooner something definite
is done in the matter the better It viii
be for the game. We have feather
weights who win the title in their class
and still continue to pose in that ca
pactty long after they have become full
hedged lightweights. with the result that
the public does not know where it
glands, and fight fans are constantly
talking at cross purposes.
The weights in boxing are based on
the English stone" system A stone
Is fourteen pounds, and the multiples
on JuaI figure furnish the basis OF the
historic classification with which follow
er5 OF puglllSm are familiar. They do
as Well as anything else, and as they
are generally understood when expressed
IN terms OF pounds, they should be ad-
hered TO.
Frank Morley. one Of the few Ameri-
can newspaper men working on English
d.
ms Ike, SENDS US a copy OF that paper
for January 20, ia which the following
valuable suggestions are advanced:
How II Started.
The Sporting life has been credited
With having Introduced many reforms in
sport, but it Is doubtful # It has ever
set on foot a reformation more urgently
needed than the proper weight classifi-
cation t5T boxing championships. IN
last Fridays issue Of the Sporting Life
was an article on the subject. written
by an Engllshman living IN America,
which contained many sound sugges-
uons-and some errors. The errors. OF
course, are slight such as the state
uenJ that the American bantamNeight
limit IS ll5 pounds (S st. 8 Id. when
II IS ll5 pounds IS ST. & lb). the same
as the British. despite the efforts OF a
lew 'sharpers' TO modify the limit for
personal purposes. But that error en-
phatically points out the necessity for
an accepted universal standard. AS
matters now stand, z. boxer can win a
world S championship in his class and
Tor ever atterWard dictate 20 all genu-
Inc Cnaleugers the weight terms under
which he Will defend his title Il is
Just SUCH condition that has led the
writer OF the article mentioned into the
error that the American bantamweight
vas 1l5 pounds. To tolerate this svs-
tenn any longer Is handing over to the
[ pugllist the entire conduct Of the game.
Inc time Is ripe for reform.
an Jne very early days or the ring,
before glove contests for championships
were recognized, there were no sub
divisions Of weights. The only recoE-
[ uize0 champion was he who was the
best or all at ali weights About the
time or Savers prime, however, came
the hrst classification the middieweight
! being the first term used. Then fol
/ lowed the lightweight, and the evolu-
: ton of the sport has brought about the
classes as we have them today. AL
tnough modern boxing had its inception
. In England, the purity Of the weight
question is maintained with greater
fidelity 10 past precedent abroad than
here. One OF the most glaring iucOn-
sIstencies ia the matter OF weight at
/ home is tn the lightweight class. When
one recalls Jack GOldswaiu. a good
/ heavy ten-stoner, holding the recognized
championship in that division. Il proves
that Inconsistency
How Lightweights Arose
The Arst recognized Lightweight.
champion Of England was Bodger
Crutchley, est 5lb. Subsequently Arthur
Chambers and Billy Edwards fought
for the title at est But Crutcalev's
weight was the accepted standard, with
the extra pound added to make. IT
Slzst. And this limit was maintained
for years in this country mp TO Jabez
Whites day, and SIS still adhered TO iu
America. Why, Tom Savers as a heavy
when they fought were only some
pounds heavier than GOidswain. What
claim. therefore, has "a lost man 10
lightweight Louors? That Is the his
tortC argument against IL. The sta
tistiCal is that the average weight of
Euglishmen is lost Surely then,
l0EC man boxing in this country should
be middleweight, and such me was in
an the featherweight class both
America and England have sinned.
Terry MCGOVcTn fixed the present limit
al SsJ 10l0, and as 1t is an excellent
intermediate weight
Fitz Changed Weights
'Tu the middlewelght class also an
alteration has been made. For years
list was the accepted maximum, and
J it1Hltl--i4DitH anu AN4i'b9Ns H'S1 iDt t4i0
worlds title at that weight, Fitzsim-
mons Weighing slightly under and
Dempsey never weighing over 1glzst.
After FitzsimmOns came the change
II occasl1ned d. remarkable journalistic
discussion. bat In was finally agreed
that although precedent was against IL.
stul the new limit. list 4lb.. admitted so
many desra ble men 10 the competition
that perhaps il was beSJ for the sport
in general that u should be allowed to
stand.
The great difference between the
lightweight (9st 1bJ and the middle