Andre Ward vs Bob Fitzsimmons

suzie, you right ******* :yep you realize what's gonna happen when luf and the others see this thread...

 

Ward would dominate Fitz, the sport's moved on, Fitz is an technically inferior lesser conditioned version of Froch

 

i'll say this: ward is probably the best true inside fighter i've seen in some time. When dawson held his arms (or tried) he was masterful at ensuring one hand was free and dominating him there. it was incredible the amount of leverage he got and power he showed on those short, inside uppercuts

 

But harder hitting.

I'll hedge my bet. 75% chance Ward dominates and completely outfoxed Fitz, 24% Ward thinks there no way this stumblebum can hit me and gets clocked, 1% one of Fitz's cornermen jumps into the ring and gets him dqed.

 

Even though Fits didn't have the best chin his punching power compared to Ward is immensly better.Fits is rated as one of the best if not the best middleweights ever and has said to be almost ''unbeatable'' at middleweight. He was a pinpoint puncher who knew the human body as well as a surgeon and would hit pressure points( Jim Corbett in the solar plexus) I have Fitszimmons winning this by knockout,knockout is the only way Fits could win i believe if it went to decision Ward would take it out.

 

Hard to tell because of the limited footage + quality of footage there is of Fitz, there is only so much a fighters record can tell you about a H2H fight between 2 fighters, I prefer to judge the styles as well as taking their quality of opposition on board.

 

No doubt Ward is the superior technical boxer, so he wins a decision, IF it goes the distance. However, there is also no doubt that he has yet to face a killer puncher like Fitz, who had condition and could take a licking and keep on ticking, and knew how to set up and time and well place ferocious devastating blows. Right now, there is no Tommy Hearns type middle/super middle, that guy with fearsome cracking power, for Ward to face. Certainly though, Ward has shown that he can beat strong men. Oddsmakers would have Ward the favorite, but it would be a nail biter as long as Fitz was firing back.

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5clfV1gZV0A[/ame]

Ward takes it. would look something like this but worse

 

Bob is no doubt one of the best punchers ever though. don't care how long ago it was

 

I'm not one of these guys that goes crazy with the "modern is always better mentality", but Bob was learning his craft in the 1800's. Gotta expect things to change. Bob is in my top 15 ever

 

I'm not sold.

Sure, Ward gives him problems, but there was a huge gulf between giving Fitzsimmons problems and beating him.

Dooley was very early (plus he was a HW) and Hall was a dive. After that who actually beat Fitz? Jeffries and then O' Brien when Bob was 40.

Fitz could beat every style - the slickster, the ruffian and the all-rounder. Accurate and a murderous puncher, often on the counter.

Nothing is certain for the comparatively inexperienced Ward.

 

Brnxhands, you are not being fair. In 1909, Fitz was totally shot. Had been for years. He was 46 years old when he fought Lang, a big strong heavy, and yet, Bob still lasted into the 12th round. But not a fair comparison for a fantasy matchup.

 

Yeah I know he was shot. It was more using it to show his general stance. He would have his hands full with somebody like andre. Bob could spark anyone though if he were to land

 

I don't think any objective observer would declare Fitz to be a "lesser conditioned" version of Froch. I think some of Fitz's workouts would make even Froch, who I have great respect for, blanch. Nor is he necessarily technically inferior. I would like to see what Froch's technique would look like if he were fighting with the gloves Fitz wore, or over the round limits and rulesets that Fitz endured.

If Ward makes one mistake or falls for one of Fitz's traps, the fight is very likely over.