Fitzsimmons vs O'brien, 7-23-1904. The fight is listed as a ND, but who really won?

[Mendoza]

It seems like the 41 year old Fitzsimmons got the better of this No decision. O’Brien was down, and in the opinion of many saved from a knockout when the bout was halted by the police.

Here's the report


[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[mattdonnellon]

Another report (The Frederick News); I wouldnt read too much into this as Jack was easily downed(Fred Cooley, Jeffords, even ancient Peter Maher come to mind as decking him) it nicely teed up a rematch.
FITZ AND O'BRIEN MIX IT UP
Fought Six Fast Rounds, With Last
Cut Short After a Knockdown.
Philadelphia, July 23.—Bob Fltzsimmons,
the grand old man of the prize
ring, and Jack O'Brien fought six
rounds at the Philadelphia National
League ball park. The bout was fast
and furious from start to finish, and
was stopped in the sixth round by the
police after O'Brien had been knocked
down. The flght still had a minute to
go, and O'Brien might not have walked
to his corner, for he had just been
knocked down to a sitting position by
one of Bob's left-hand jolts and had
not fully recovered when the bell
sounded, ending the contest, in obedienco
to a motion of command from
the police official. One smash on the
jaw from Fitz's terrible right might
have sent Jack to dreamland, and Bob
was steadying himself for the blow
when the gong rang.
But while worsted, O'Brien was not
disgraced. In fact he made friends by
the flght he put up. Jack carried the
flght to Fltzsimmons in the earlier
rounds and did comparatively little
running away throughout the contest
He was down four times all told—once
In the first, fourth, fifth and sixth
rounds—but was dazed but once, and
that was the last time, in the sixth.
O'Brien hit Fitzslmmons even more
often than Bob hit him, and had Bob's
face bleeding from the first round, but
the Philadelphia boxer was never able
to shake the old-timer, who stands
very firmly on his feet.

[Mendoza]

He was down four times all told—once
In the first, fourth, fifth and sixth
rounds—but was dazed but once, and
that was the last time, in the sixth.

Sounds like Fitz won the fight.

[mattdonnellon]

I agree. I have also read several other reports mostly of the same type but some give O'Brien 50/50. One point to remember,in those days a knockdown did not carry the same weight(figuratively!) as to-day-perhaps a relic of London Prize Rules?

[Mendoza]

I agree. I have also read several other reports mostly of the same type but some give O'Brien 50/50. One point to remember,in those days a knockdown did not carry the same weight(figuratively!) as to-day-perhaps a relic of London Prize Rules?

Did you know Fitz and Burns were ready to fight when the event was halted?

[mattdonnellon]

YEp. Prob. a bridge too far for Fitz at that time.

[Senya13]

A draw seems like appropriate result.

[Dempsey1238]

Think at that time, Fitz may have been over his head vs Tommy Burns. Burns was in his prime and on top of the world as champ. Fitz was on the way out. Prime vs Prime is other matter though.

[Mendoza]

Think at that time, Fitz may have been over his head vs Tommy Burns. Burns was in his prime and on top of the world as champ. Fitz was on the way out. Prime vs Prime is other matter though.

It depends if Fitz was in shape. The article claims he was. Burns was not hard to find on film.

The time was May 1906. Burns had just beaten Hart for the title, but lost in 1905 to Jack T. Sullivan. He also had some draws in 1905 to Kelly, and lsot to the same O'Brien Fitz did well agaisnt in 1904. My point is Bruns was not at his best yet in 1906.

Imagime if the fight went off, and Fitz reclaimed the heavyweight title. WOW.

Here is the read.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]