Norwich bulletin., 1915-09-14

wherein neither could win, lose or ever
oraW. where the money was paid u
mem IN advance without a bubble
ana where there was not the slightes
cnance o. either being sent to the
matting Tor a decisive win or loss
tnere was not a spur to keep them t
their best.
Whether they did their best, there
= wide variance OF opinion. as has
lake pure and simple said ons
ran who was at the ringside. y
90 not think either man was tryina
and that they were boxing merely for
the moving pictures. think Gibbons
could have defeated Mcfarland had he
tried. in fact. did have the better OF
the affair In the fact that he landed the
cleaner blows. but he pulled his punch
60 something wicked. He did not APP
pear to want to injure Mcfarland. and
missed SO many times that wondered
now ne kept straight face. II my
guess Is not a bad one, the pair win try
the thing all over again somewhere
else. but Just where do not know"
Another Boston man who saw the
bout hands this as his opinion:
They were not trying. and MANY of
tnose about the ring were not back
ward In saying so. Gibbons did a lot
OF missing, while McFarland's endeay-
ors were confined to slaps with the
open hand and much pulling of the
gloves across Gibbons face when At
close quarters. As a real night ~ us .
q farce
Conversation Round
The men were talking to each other
throughout the contest, and 1 heart
Giooons say to Mcfarland, Speed up
In the next round It is also tine thaf
the pair got the goat of Commissioner
OiNeil, and during the lull between fine
sixth and seventh rounds he sent q
note by way of the press stand 70
Aereree job asking that official to tell
tne men to brace up or there would be
In all of the accounts of the tr,v
much appears concerning McFarIand
nltung with the open glove, so IT is
larry SAFE to assume that he dfd q
LOT or Shaping or paving. 1t was mn
70 tne referee to have stopped this
SOFT OF cat work but in none of the
accounts is there any word that he
even cautioned Mcfarland on thia
point but on this point hinges a large
part OF the question which man had
me oetter or the encounter. Admitting
that GiDoons frequently missed. when
ne old land it was with the knucLrIe
part OF the glove, and though McFars
tano Is said to have landed the more
blows. they were mostly with the omen
nand The rubs across Gibbons, face
10 NOT count at all, and neither should
sA1P9- LA0 NSuSenSDerTY rules
under which the contest Of SATURDAY
ngnt was governed, are entirely ont ~
GATE ana moss-grown as regards the
modern ring and contain nothing as 70
Wnat blows shall or shall not count
BUT the AFFAIR was nevertheless a how
ing contest and one for points and
whhe the Queensberry code prevailed
SO 1ar as 1T goes the rules governing
glove competitions have this TO say:
Up to Referee.
n. The referee may, after cautfonin1
the offender. disqualify a Competitor
VINO Is boxing unfairly by f1icIin0 or
hitting with the open glove, or by hit
tlng with the inside or butt of the
Nothing is said about points in m.
2ueensberry rules, but as the men on
saturday night were boxing for points.
pr supposed to be, We must turn to the
amateur Boxing association rules
WnlcnN state: The points shall be-for
altack direct clean hits with the
5nucSles of either hand on any mart m
ne 'front.' or sides of the head or BODY
above the belt" wy
These rules. while apparently not on.
orced saturday night, figure neverthe- |
esS IN forming conclusion as 10
Nnlcn man had the better of the en-
counter from the standpoint of boxtne |
md as Mcfarland used the omen hanSIs |
tnd GIBBONS landed with his knuckles.