Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1913-07-25

that Palzer is the best man in sight
and man who has a corking good
chance in trimming Johnson, con-
sidering Johnson's condition at the
present time. But object, as lots of
others do. to the cant and hypocrisy
which has been INDUCED in by sport
ing writer's in general, yourself in
Guided, my dear fellow, with regard
to Palzer and o'Rourke. I will never
forget the slurs that were heaped
upon poor Palzer's head after his
fight with Bombardier Wells, simply
because he had parted company with
Tom O'Rourke. Before that he had
been boosted to the skies, but when
he gave O'Rourke the frozen mitt the
so-called experts, evidently forgetting
that they had a fair-minded public
to deal with, Immediately started to
knock Palzer in a most unfair and
disgraceful manner. Now that he has
again hooked up with O'Rourke they
Immediately find out that he is the
best material in sight.
O'Rourke must hold the evil eye
over you guys. Why should o'Rourke
be in any way considered responsible
for Palzer's success? When O'Rourke
was not in Palzer's corner in his fight
with Wells, but was hooting and
bowling against him and trying to
give Wells advice as to how to knock
him out, Palzer made the most splen-
didly game fight l have ever seen
any man make and finally got to
Wells with a knockout. In his fight
with McCarty, however, he followed
O'Rourke's megaphoned instructions
to the letter, with the result that he
was made to look foolish. whereas. if
he had fought his own battle he
would have knocked McCarty silly in
five or six rounds, sick as he was at
the time. And yet you boob writer's
harp on "O'Rourke's coaching"
"O'Rourke's judgment" and a lot of
other rot.
AS q rule, you are a pretty sensible
writer and turn out good stuff, but
in this instance you have been as
silly as the rest. For the love of
Mike, have done with this sickening
hypocritical cant. If Palzer is a
wonder at one time, he is q wonder
at another, and his quarrels with
O'Rourlse have nothing to do with his
status as fighter. Do you get me?
Yours for a square deal.
ARTHUR K. STRINGER.
In way you are right-again. you
are wrong. The Importance of man
ayers is a matter Of opinion. Person
ally 1 consider good manager as
essential as a fighter and ORourke,
known, is a good manager. Besides. l
always view things from the sporting
standpoint. When~ Palzer turned
O'Rourke down I, and others, no
doubt, felt as IL he were an migrate,
for O'Rourke picked him up, nursed
him along, gave him money to get
by on, and then at the first chance for
big money, AL passes his benefactor
up. No, 1 can't see that nohow, but
never allow such things to interfere
with my Judgment when l can help
II. With O'Rourke. Palzer was much
better off than without O'Rourke, and
that's the view took of 1t. From a
sporting angle. in throwing down
| O'Rourke Palzer wasn't deserving OF
any consideration. Palzer realizes
this himself now. He came back to
O'Rourke and If he has 1t in him
o'Rourke will get him to the top.
| c.
Everybody says Frank Million il
a lucky man, and what everybody
says, according to history, must b'
SO. The defeat of Ellegaard, ordi'
narily. would have been hard blow
for the Dane was brought over here
at big expense, but the defeat Of
Enegaard by Jackie Clark, the lido
of the velodrome. is really a peace
Of luck for the lucky Mr.. Million
Whatever the Velodrome owner
might lose as result of the defeat
Of the Dane he viii more than make