CORRESPONDENCE.
BOXING DIFFERENCES.
(To the Editor.) Sir,—T will he pleased if you will publish the following reply to M. C. Breeze’s letter. I wish to reply that everything that I wrote is correct. Can M. C. Breeze prove that the hoy was not in the ost. 31bs. to (Ist. P If so, 1 will give a medal to he decided on by the Boxing Association Committee. If I am in the wrong. T will challenge the opponent LI. Breeze to weigh Ist. Gibs, on AY. E. Williams's scales. The writer suggests that A!. Keenan had no right to be in the filial. .1 would like to ask the writer why M. Keenan was ineligible to contest in the babyweight. I still maintain that there were only two eligible, they being M Keenan and I. Baker. If M. C. Breere can prove, to me otherwise through your columns, I am prepared to present a medal at the next tournament. would, as a sport, like to hear from M. C. Breeze who put Staines and Sanders back into the baby class and what authority they had? If M. C-r Breeze cannot answer this, perhaps the Committee will enlighten me. Thanking you in anticipation,—l am etc., T. ANDERSON. Woodstock, February Gtli, .1929.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HOG19290206.2.6
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Hokitika Guardian, 6 February 1929, Page 1
Word count
Tapeke kupu
209CORRESPONDENCE. BOXING DIFFERENCES. Hokitika Guardian, 6 February 1929, Page 1
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
The Greymouth Evening Star Co Ltd is the copyright owner for the Hokitika Guardian. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of the Greymouth Evening Star Co Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in