Fitzsimmons vs Sharkey and a Proper Controversy

There have been a few articles about the biggest robberies in the ring recently or the most inept judging performances we have had to endure and whilst the likes of Reid Ottke and Roy Jones Olympic final rightly get mentioned heavily, thought it might be an opportune moment to talk about a questionable decision from boxing’s earlier days, firstly because it is an interesting story and secondly because it perhaps brings into focus that perhaps nowadays we don’t have it so bad as we like to think in terms of poor refereeing and questionable decisions.

Quite possibly, what still stands as the worst display of refereeing ever in a major fight occurred in the fight some years ago between Bob Fitzsimmons and Sailor Tom Sharkey. When this fight was made an agreement was made that Fitzsimmons’ managers would make a recommendation for who should referee and should the referee be agreed by Sharkey’s people he would be duly appointed. In the event that the two parties could not agree a referee one would be appointed by the sporting club promoting the fight. Fitzsimmons people agreed to this as they assumed that they would put forward one of the reputable, experienced referees of the day and this would be agreed as was normally the case. However after putting forward any number of top tier referees to Sharkey’s people they were all dismissed out of hand with little or no explanation. This raised concerns amongst Fitz’s people as Sharkey was a fighter, who being kind you would have to say was adept at the dark arts once inside the ring, and as such obviously Bob’s people were keen to secure the services of a referee of both experience and unquestionable integrity.

With the failure of both parties to agree a ref, the responsibility for appointing one fell to the club who many felt would appoint one of the reputable referees of the day but took the staggering decision to appoint famous lawman and boxing fan Wyatt Earp, a man of virtually no experience in refereeing fights. Fitzsimmons’ team objected in the most aggressive terms but as they had agreed to this measure in the contract so were obliged to carry through with the fight. Come fight night when Earp was announced as the ref many in the crowd raised objections. Now at that time it was considered gentlemanly and good form for a referee to step down were objections raised from the crowd but despite the objections being loud and manifold Earp point blank refused to step down.

Come the fight Fitz was obviously wary something untoward was potentially happening and made a conscious effort not to do anything that could be construed as foul or questionable, the same however cannot be said about Sharkey who did what he always tended to do and fouled and low blowed his way through the bout, none of which infractions were called by Earp. However despite Sharkey’s numerous fouls Fitz gave him a right royal beating, winning nearly every round to the point that by the ninth Sharkey was all but spent, and with Fitz about to put the finishing punches on an impressive victory he hit Sharkey to the body, only for Earp to leap in, declare the punch low and disqualify Fitz.

This decision was odd to say the least, for one almost all at ringside agreed the blow was legal, it was also Fitz’ first infraction and should have attracted a warning at best and it also ignored the innumerable fouls Sharkey has most certainly thrown.

The fallout from this fight was unprecedented and made the fuss about Holyfield Lewis many years later look almost trivial by comparison. Such was the outcry at the result and Earp’s performance it was agreed to go to court to decide if foul play had occurred and to see if the decision should be reversed. When the fight went to court the judge stated that as boxing was not strictly speaking legal he had no real authority to hear the case but he stated if both parties were willing to accept this he would hear the case and both parties agreed that they would hear the case to its conclusion and neither parties would seek to get the case dismissed on this technicality. However once the case started it started to go seriously badly for Sharkey and his people, claims made that Earp did not know Sharkey’s manager or the head of the club promoting the fight were disproven and it was also established that there had been strange betting patterns on Sharkey to win the fight once Earp’s appointment was announced, several from well known gamblers, famed for not betting on anything but sure things, which seems strange given Fitz had been a heavy favourite.

With the case going against them Sharkey’s people then ignored their previous agreement to hear the case to its conclusion and had it dismissed on the grounds the judge had no authority to judge an activity that was essentilly illegal and the case was dismissed and the result stands to this day as an undeserving loss in Fitz' record. I would defy anyone to name a more questionable fight in the games history.

* Please note - This article draws heavily on Adam Pollack's book In the Ring with Bob Fitzsimmons, anyone interested in Fitzsimmons or this story would be recommended to read this excellent book. *