El Paso herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1901-1931, 1919-08-28
Gan1eStAnd Best Boxers Neuer Win OrL0Se
Fights On Foul BIO70S Intentional Loo
BIO70S Bad; Epidemic Causes Discussion


I also with Jack Lopez-the least that
| can be said is that It was a very
I unfortunate time for foul If Carl
I son wanted fans to believe that he
I had undergone a ring transformation
The latest bout to be awarded
on n foul was in the Gundy-ROE-
ers contest ut Columbus. The
newspapers at the time gave the
sRabbitT the benefit of the doubt
and said that he probably didn't
intend = foul
Time for reflection and examina-
ton of all the incidents concerned
would seem to indicate that Rogers
fouled Intentionally and unpardon-
ably Nick Gundy states that he
to foul him but II don't look that
way. Referee Studer was forced to
caution Rogers for fouling Gundy be-
fore the foul was committed which
gave Gundy the bout. Between the
first and second fouls Rogers r.
lated Gundy with about everything
a tongue can handle Then came the
second foul after Rogers had received
q wallop in the stomach which caused
him some distress
Used Old Tactics
An old timer at the boxing game
who saw the bout said; 1t was ole
stuff that Rogers started the fight
with. He was trying by AL the
methods known 20 ringsters TO get
Gundys goat When Gundy smiled
at him after the first foul and after
Rogers had belated him and said:
You can't get ny goat; Ro,gers. il
was plain enough that Gundy knew
what the Rabbit was trying TO do
In my opinion Rogers weakened when
he saw he had failed TO get Gundy's
goat and when wallopei one HIM
self such as Gundy had been taking
without complaint. deliberately ended
the fight by a foul"
Blow Was Low,
Lieut. Carl J. Studer who refer
eed the bout. stated Tuesday TO a
friend that when he separated the
two after the foul. that the Rabbits
arm was still between Gundy's legs.
Nick having caught the arm and held
it right where the foul blow was
struck. According TO Lieut.. Studer
the foul was deliberate.
When to these circumstances
he added the fact that after the
bout Rogers, backea by some dOz-
en- other negroes, attempted to
quarrel with Gundy on the streets
OF Columbus and was finally or
dered to move on by provost
guard il does not appear that
Rogers was any too clean in the
bout. to say the least.
Some Fouls UnintentionaL
An unintentional foul is generally
apparent A year ago in & bout at
Fort Bliss Tommy Carter shot a
straight left at Kid Young's stomach
Young parted IL in such a way that
II was knocked down The blow was
painful but neither Carter nor Young
could help II. The two shook hands
and proceeded with the bout. Again
in the bout with Otto Wallace Car
ter landed a blow low.
He promptly acknowledged II
by asking pardOns he and Wal
lace shook hands and proceeded.
Later Wallace landed n slight
blow low and Carter stnI an
other. 1t was apparent to every
body that neither Of these men
intended foul. Neither was any
damage done. Both showed good
Intentions by avoiding fouls ut
the time they wee fighting the
hardest.
In the Gundy-Douglas bout con-
siderable alteration was caused by
Douglass claim Of foul. Inasmuch
as the referee neglected to make
plain to the fans before the bout
started exactly what a clean break
would be in the bout. it was more
or less difficult to say just what
ought to have been done in the
matter.
shOuId step Back
RAD Lieut. MCCARTHY reIerees
stated that the. men were to step
back a certain distance equal 70
enough space for him to go between
them. most certainly Gundy was gull
~ OF a foul Yet there is another
angle TO it as given by Arthur Holm
gren, Gundy's manager, who recently
stated; Boxing is taking any fair
advantage-that's the game A clean
break merely means that the contes-
tants are not 70 strike each other
while starting to break and when
but one arm is free. Without other
agreement it is allowable for either
boxer TO hit as quickly as possible
after no part Of the body OF one
touches the body Of the other.
called Nick's attention to this fact 3
and he took ADVANTAGE OF It by wall /
looping Douglas most beautifully
but entirely fair and within the
rules"
Correct In Way
Holmgren's contention is correct
enough as to theor.- but as the par
ticular agreement about breaks was
no further explained to the fans than !
1t was to be clean" breaks. much I
confusion followed which could easily [,
have been avoided by a referees eX- I
PLANTATION before the battle.
just how the referee himself