January 2002 - July 2006 - The Jerry Quarry Foundation

Commission has no power or standing to sanction such a fight. Neither does MSG
or the media.Frazier Groupie 2 maintains that the New York State Boxing
Commission sanctioned the fight as an elimination and so did MSG and the press.
I'll say it again. The New York Commission, the press, and MSG have no authority
to do that.What happened is this. A Frazier v Quarry (2) was not a
fighting the regular fan wanted to watch. It was a rematch and Frazier had
already beaten Quarry years earlier. Also, by that stage, Frazier had lost 2 of
his last 3 fights.So, to make the fight more attractive MSG began
publicizing it as a sanctioned eliminator, even though it wasn't. MSG got its
pals in the New York Commission to play along with it, and its pals in the
newspapers did too. It sold tickets and made the fight more attractive.
But it was never a sanctioned eliminator. Neither the champion or the world
governing body sanctioned the fight.Even if we accept the facts as
provided by Groupie 2, those facts demonstrate that it was NOT a sanctioned
eliminator. It is not a hard concept to grasp. But rather than admit being
wrong, Groupies argue semantics.Okay, whatever, but if that stubborn
attitude rubs off on your credibility don't yelp like a stuffed pig.Go
back through the posts and read how rude Groupie 2 was when trying to attack me
when I innocently asked whether you were certain that it was a sanctioned fight.
Had I spoken to someone like Groupie 2 did then I would have been pulled
up.All of this doesn't worry me because I have been vindicated and I
know that I was not being rude or offensive when I asked you to confirm that it
was a sanctioned eliminator. If you want to portray yourself as being fair and
even handed, then pull Groupie 2 into line when he chucks his regular hissy
fits.|
|3/6/05 09:38:55 AM|Kent|La Habra, Ca||kentallenent@aol.com||||10|Noam, no you
were not being rude by arguing a fight was not an official title elimination
fight. I have no problem with that. It is when you started taking personal pot
shots at me is when I had a problem with you. YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHO
STARTED IT BETWEEN YOU AND FOREST AND I AM NOT GOING THROUGH ALL OF THOSE POSTS
TO FIGURE IT OUT BECAUSE IT WAS BETWEEN YOU AND HIM. BESIDES, WHO APPOINTED ME
REFEREE HERE? I have been fair here in my arguments about the subject
and that is all I can do. My argument centers on how much power the New York
State Athletic Commision had at the time in question, 1974. Because if it still
had as much power as it did in 1968, then if it ruled Frazier/Quarry 2 was a
title elimination this rivaled the power of the WBA even if the WBA didn't
sanction it as such. The question centers on if the New York commision still had
the backing of other states here in America and other countries that formed the
rival WBC, which it did in 1968. That the New York commision had more power than
other state commisions is seen by its recognition of Frazier as world champion
in 1968, a title that carried at least as much weight if not more so then
Ellis's WBA title.There, I have presented information that still puts in
dispute your contention that the fight in question was not a title elimintion
fight. My position still stands as not being sure if it was or not. A
position, I will again add has changed from saying it was. This movement
towards your position was brought on by your arguments. So I am being
reasonable. I have to do more research on the subject when time permits. |
|3/6/05 02:54:59 PM|Noam|same||same||||10|KentThis is getting
ridiculous. In my post I asked a question directly to you whether that fight was
an official elimination. It was not meant to be rude and could not be read as
such.However, Groupie 2 (Forest) decided to interrupt, abusing me for
asking you the question. In some irrational hissy fit he became
abusive.In reply, I explained that the question was not meant to be rude
and that I didn't understand how it could be interpreted that way. I then
commented that I didn't think that Kent would have been offended and questioned
whether you were offended. You didn't bother to address that
question.The first question was just a simple question querying whether