» » The Earp Decision (The Early West)

The Earp Decision (The Early West) epub download

by Jack Demattos


By (author) Jack DeMattos.

The Earp Decision book. The Earp Decision (The Early West). 0932702473 (ISBN13: 9780932702470). Details (if other): Cancel. Thanks for telling us about the problem.

Wyatt Berry Stapp Earp (March 19, 1848 – January 13, 1929) was an American Old West lawman and gambler in Cochise County, Arizona Territory, and a deputy marshal in Tombstone

Wyatt Berry Stapp Earp (March 19, 1848 – January 13, 1929) was an American Old West lawman and gambler in Cochise County, Arizona Territory, and a deputy marshal in Tombstone. He worked in a wide variety of trades throughout his life and took part in the famous gunfight at the . Corral, during which lawmen killed three outlaw Cochise County Cowboys. He is often erroneously regarded as the central figure in the shootout, although his brother Virgil was Tombstone city marshal and deputy .

com: The Earp Decision: 207pp/illus. However, the incident that catapulted Wyatt Earp into national headlines during his lifetime is the basis of this book. Wyatt Earp walked into a fifteen-foot wide vacant lot and with two of his brothers and Doc Holiday to face the McLaurys and the Clantons. That twenty-five second gunfight that followed became the most famous shoot-out in history. It was Wyatt Earp's decision in the heavyweight bout between Robert Fitzsimmons and 'Sailor' Tom Sharkey on December 2, 1896, in San Francisco.

Early decision (ED) or early acceptance is a common policy used in college admissions in the United States for admitting freshmen to undergraduate programs. It is used to indicate to the university or college that the candidate considers that institution to be his or her top choice. Some colleges offer early admission plans known as Early Decision (ED) or Early Action (EA), and some offer both. Others accept applications in a relatively long window known as rolling admission

Her parents Jim and Theresa Earle began The Early West (which published Earp Decision) in College Station, Texas, in 1978 by publishing their first book John Wesley Hardin by Chuck Parsons.

The boy’s referring to the cabbage simply as the head haunted Leonard . Leonard had not noticed on the street how big his fellow West Virginian had grown.

The boy’s referring to the cabbage simply as the head haunted Leonard, and he started as if at a ghost when, emerging with Robin into the narrow street, the head of a passerby looked vividly familiar; it was the handsomely sculpted head alone, for otherwise Jack Fredericks had quite blended i. Embarrassed and hence stubborn, Jack lay down on the shallow ledge designed to set off the exhibits, in a place just behind the table supporting the still life, and smiled up quizzically at the faces of the painters.

Jack Wilshere’s decision to join West Ham United is ‘appalling’ and detrimental to his career. However Durham blasted the midfielder for picking the ‘nice’ option and labelled his decision the ‘early stages of retirement’. That’s according to talkSPORT’s very own Adrian Durham, who slammed the former Arsenal midfielder for choosing to sign for the Hammers on a free transfer. Our new midfielder has arrived. pi. witter. West Ham United (HamUtd) July 9, 2018. The last thing he needs is nice, he needs to challenge himself, he said. Just do something a little bit different!

Book by Demattos, Jack

The Earp Decision (The Early West) epub download

ISBN13: 978-0932702470

ISBN: 0932702473

Author: Jack Demattos

Category: Sports and Outdoors

Subcategory: Individual Sports

Language: English

Publisher: Early West; 1st edition (September 1, 1989)

Pages: 207 pages

ePUB size: 1757 kb

FB2 size: 1634 kb

Rating: 4.9

Votes: 747

Other Formats: txt mbr rtf doc

Related to The Earp Decision (The Early West) ePub books

Barinirm
In this his third book, author DeMattos examines referee Wyatt Earp's decision in the Decmber 1896 heavyweight boxing match between Tom Sharkey and Bob Fitzsimmons. Although this wasn't a championship bout it aroused intense interest among San Francisco's gambling fraternity. It's clear Earp's participation in this fight proved very damaging to his reputation as it allowed newspapers to rake over his controversial past; to print false information; and to patronize his alleged "two-gun" image.
DeMattos uses contemporary articles from the San Francisco newspapers, (Call, Chronicle, Examiner) to present his story. The book has interesting editorial cartoons from 1896, which complement the text. The author's reliance on the Examiner's version of the bout rises and falls based the accuracy and/or bias of the reporters. Fault can be found as DeMattos doesn't amplify beyond what is printed in the Examiner (and to a lesser degree in the Call) leaving the impression Wyatt Earp was probably involved in a fix.
There were rumblings in the Fitzsimmons' camp that the fight was fixed and Earp, as referee, was in on the fix. He denied the charge and offered to withdraw. Both fighters and their managers agreed to employ Wyatt Earp as the fight was imminent and they had previously rejected all of the other proposed referees. The Chronicle claimed Earp got the "job (as it) was considered undesirable." Wyatt Earp had some experience as a referee but none with the Marquis of Queensbury rules and certainly none with the notoriety of this bout.
Earp awarded the fight to Sharkey due to an alleged disabling foul committed by Fitzsimmons. Over the intervening years a variety of "authorities" have denounced Earp's judgment as a flagrant, if not crooked, decision basing their opinions on personal biases and/or statements made by Earp's contemporaries with axes to grind. After the fight, Earp's early years were raked over and outrageous incidents were manufactured and reported as fact by at least one newspaper who created a conspiracy ostensibly because of Wyatt's friendship with the owner of a competing San Francisco paper.
During the fight, both fighters were often clumsy, wrestling and pushing each other around the ring. Sharkey was very short, very strong, easy to hit, hard to hurt, and very unscientific. Fitzsimmons was tall, a bulked-up middleweight, a good defensive fighter, a hard puncher, and an accomplsihed fouler. Each struck the other more than 50 times but often missed their target. Sharkey hit the canvas four times and Fitzsimmons three times. The fight was fairly even (Fitzsimmons slightly ahead) until the eight round when Fitzsimmons threw his "infamous" solar plexus punch (presently outlawed in boxing matches) which can foul an opponent if not delivered precisely. Fitzsimmons was known as a "cute" fighter who was not adverse to fouling an opponent with clever ploys including an elbow follow-through, and a low solar plexus punch. Sharkey also fouled by hitting on the break, gouging, and "bulling" an opponent around the ring. Nineteenth cnetury boxing referees expected fouling during a fight but were primarily concerned with fouls that disabled a fighter.
Prize fighting with gloves wasn't legal in the United States. While the bout had no legal standing in a court of law the public was treated to a "Kangaroo" court conducted by newspaper reporters. (The prize money was initially held up after the bout but was released when judge denied jurisdiction) In 19th century boxing matches, a referee such as Wyatt Earp often decided the outcome of a bout. This power was double edged as a referee could get into serious trouble with an unruly crowd that favored one of the fighters or with gamblers who stood to lose a lot of money. Referees were known to have fled a boxing ring at the end of a fight and to have rendered their decision a day or so later, many miles from the scene. In one major battle, a referee was threatened between rounds with a knife and was shot at after the fight ended.
Problems encountered by a reader are alleged stories of Earp's past life without any attempt by the author to prove whether they were accurate. Three patently false stories concern a fixed horse race, a gold brick scam, and claim jumping all of which Wyatt Earp allegedly masterminded.
Did Wyatt Earp fix the contest for Sharkey? It's a tough call for a reader to make at this late date with all the conflicting information presented in this book. Fixed fights weren't uncommon in the 19th century. There are indicators to support either side of the argument. To give Wyatt the benefit of the doubt: he had been warned in advance that he was going to fix the fight; he had little time to blend into a complicated scam that fixed fights require; there was no proof that he made any money from the fight other than the referee's cut; his friend Bat Masterson had bet on Fitzsimmons; Fitzsimmons' famed solar plexus punch often bordered on a foul; six doctors examined Sharkey and certified he was fouled; and Fitzsimmons was involved in another boxing match wherein he lost due to a similar foul.
This book will be of interest to aficionados of Wyatt Earp if only to argue about its premise. It can also prove frustrating as the author did not do a professional job of checking his facts, in particular, his lack of knowledge about the early fight game. He also seems to have accepted certain stories about Wyatt Earp with little effort made to prove or disprove their validty. While Waytt Earp wasn't a saint, he wasn't the epitome of original sin.
Barinirm
In this his third book, author DeMattos examines referee Wyatt Earp's decision in the Decmber 1896 heavyweight boxing match between Tom Sharkey and Bob Fitzsimmons. Although this wasn't a championship bout it aroused intense interest among San Francisco's gambling fraternity. It's clear Earp's participation in this fight proved very damaging to his reputation as it allowed newspapers to rake over his controversial past; to print false information; and to patronize his alleged "two-gun" image.
DeMattos uses contemporary articles from the San Francisco newspapers, (Call, Chronicle, Examiner) to present his story. The book has interesting editorial cartoons from 1896, which complement the text. The author's reliance on the Examiner's version of the bout rises and falls based the accuracy and/or bias of the reporters. Fault can be found as DeMattos doesn't amplify beyond what is printed in the Examiner (and to a lesser degree in the Call) leaving the impression Wyatt Earp was probably involved in a fix.
There were rumblings in the Fitzsimmons' camp that the fight was fixed and Earp, as referee, was in on the fix. He denied the charge and offered to withdraw. Both fighters and their managers agreed to employ Wyatt Earp as the fight was imminent and they had previously rejected all of the other proposed referees. The Chronicle claimed Earp got the "job (as it) was considered undesirable." Wyatt Earp had some experience as a referee but none with the Marquis of Queensbury rules and certainly none with the notoriety of this bout.
Earp awarded the fight to Sharkey due to an alleged disabling foul committed by Fitzsimmons. Over the intervening years a variety of "authorities" have denounced Earp's judgment as a flagrant, if not crooked, decision basing their opinions on personal biases and/or statements made by Earp's contemporaries with axes to grind. After the fight, Earp's early years were raked over and outrageous incidents were manufactured and reported as fact by at least one newspaper who created a conspiracy ostensibly because of Wyatt's friendship with the owner of a competing San Francisco paper.
During the fight, both fighters were often clumsy, wrestling and pushing each other around the ring. Sharkey was very short, very strong, easy to hit, hard to hurt, and very unscientific. Fitzsimmons was tall, a bulked-up middleweight, a good defensive fighter, a hard puncher, and an accomplsihed fouler. Each struck the other more than 50 times but often missed their target. Sharkey hit the canvas four times and Fitzsimmons three times. The fight was fairly even (Fitzsimmons slightly ahead) until the eight round when Fitzsimmons threw his "infamous" solar plexus punch (presently outlawed in boxing matches) which can foul an opponent if not delivered precisely. Fitzsimmons was known as a "cute" fighter who was not adverse to fouling an opponent with clever ploys including an elbow follow-through, and a low solar plexus punch. Sharkey also fouled by hitting on the break, gouging, and "bulling" an opponent around the ring. Nineteenth cnetury boxing referees expected fouling during a fight but were primarily concerned with fouls that disabled a fighter.
Prize fighting with gloves wasn't legal in the United States. While the bout had no legal standing in a court of law the public was treated to a "Kangaroo" court conducted by newspaper reporters. (The prize money was initially held up after the bout but was released when judge denied jurisdiction) In 19th century boxing matches, a referee such as Wyatt Earp often decided the outcome of a bout. This power was double edged as a referee could get into serious trouble with an unruly crowd that favored one of the fighters or with gamblers who stood to lose a lot of money. Referees were known to have fled a boxing ring at the end of a fight and to have rendered their decision a day or so later, many miles from the scene. In one major battle, a referee was threatened between rounds with a knife and was shot at after the fight ended.
Problems encountered by a reader are alleged stories of Earp's past life without any attempt by the author to prove whether they were accurate. Three patently false stories concern a fixed horse race, a gold brick scam, and claim jumping all of which Wyatt Earp allegedly masterminded.
Did Wyatt Earp fix the contest for Sharkey? It's a tough call for a reader to make at this late date with all the conflicting information presented in this book. Fixed fights weren't uncommon in the 19th century. There are indicators to support either side of the argument. To give Wyatt the benefit of the doubt: he had been warned in advance that he was going to fix the fight; he had little time to blend into a complicated scam that fixed fights require; there was no proof that he made any money from the fight other than the referee's cut; his friend Bat Masterson had bet on Fitzsimmons; Fitzsimmons' famed solar plexus punch often bordered on a foul; six doctors examined Sharkey and certified he was fouled; and Fitzsimmons was involved in another boxing match wherein he lost due to a similar foul.
This book will be of interest to aficionados of Wyatt Earp if only to argue about its premise. It can also prove frustrating as the author did not do a professional job of checking his facts, in particular, his lack of knowledge about the early fight game. He also seems to have accepted certain stories about Wyatt Earp with little effort made to prove or disprove their validty. While Waytt Earp wasn't a saint, he wasn't the epitome of original sin.
Rageseeker
To quote the late sacred elder of Western research and writing, C. Leland Sonnichsen, "I don't see why this book had to be written!" The reason is that the writer had pre-selected his conclusion and considered only information that tended to prove his prejudice. This is so obvious as to turn off an unbiased reader.

Save your money. This book is unsliced baloney.
Rageseeker
To quote the late sacred elder of Western research and writing, C. Leland Sonnichsen, "I don't see why this book had to be written!" The reason is that the writer had pre-selected his conclusion and considered only information that tended to prove his prejudice. This is so obvious as to turn off an unbiased reader.

Save your money. This book is unsliced baloney.