Prime for prime, I would have to call it about even, though I rate Wills higher on a heavyweight list. The lack of footage of Wills in his prime, makes a decisive pick difficult.
But you can't look at their records and see how much cleaner and higher quality wills record is? Willard lost to two tomato cans in his prime and was badly outboxed by gunboat smith, whose nowhere near on Wills level
How is Willard gonna defeat wills? Willard had a size advantage, but not an overwhelming one...wills was probably stronger despite the size difference, he certainly knew how to use his size advantage more. Wills was much more athletic, had far greater defense, much more skilled, had faster hands, was the better all around puncher, and was far far more proven against quality competition with no bad losses in his prime.
I can see that Wills has a much deeper resume, and that he was doing quality work over a longer period, but I am not seeing the case for him being much better at their respective peaks.
Wills at his peak was a great fighter. He toyed with a top ranked 6'6 fighter in 3 rounds, whom embarrassed Willard in a sparring session in 1917, and Willard avoided him after that. Was Willard better than Fulton? Probably not. We know wills was much much better than Fulton.
I wouldn't say that Wills toyed with Fulton exactly. Fulton seems to have been out boxing him, when Wills exploited or forced a mistake. Of course at this stage, Dempsey had given him the blueprint for doing it. Fulton does seem to have had the better of Willard in sparring, but that does not mean that he would have won a fight against him. It must also be noted that there were political reasons behind Willard Fulton not happening, namely the First Wold War.
Where did you get that hogwash? Wills decimated him in 3 rounds, breaking 2 of his ribs. I have heard you say in the past Fulton Willard is a 50-50... We've established a peak wills being on a much higher level than Fulton. So in a 15 round fight which doesn't favor Willard, how does he beat wills?
And how do you explain his in prime losses to 24-21 macmahon and 19-9 rodel? Both tomato cans wills would have knocked out with his eyes closed
Wills did put Fulton away in the third round, but I don't think that he toyed with him as you say. Yes if Fulton had got the title shot instead of Dempsey, you would have to give Fulton a fair chance. Wills won convincingly enough, but Fulton did a lot better against Langford, and you can see why he was the betting favorite. Even over fifteen rounds, Willard's physical advantages could have troubled Wills. He clearly struggled with Big Bill Tate.
Did Fulton do a lot better against Langford? By 1917-1918 wills was kicking the crap out of that version of Langford. The 1914-1915 Langford had closed results against wills because he was younger and wills was still very green. How does Fulton do against Langford in 1914? "Willards physical advantages" He had no idea how to use them which is why he allowed 180-190lb men, some of which were tomato cans to outbox him. Wilson showed against Fulton, a man of that height and reach causes him no problems at all
Both the Rodel & McMahon fights are listed in some sources as No Decs. A month after the Rodel fight they met again and Willard kod him in9 rds and 6rds a while later.You must take into account that the first Rodel fight was Willard's first bout after killing Bull Young, he was understandably hesitant. Nov 17 George "Boer" Rodel Milwaukee, Wi ND 10 Nov 24 Jack Reed Fort Wayne, In KO 2 Dec 3 Carl Morris New York, NY ND 10 Dec 12 George "One-Round" Davis Buffalo, NY KO 2 Dec 29 George "Boer" Rodel New Haven, Ct KO 9 1914 Mar 27 Tom "Bearcat" McMahon Youngstown, Oh ND 12 -Some sources report "L 12"
The devil is in the detain on this one. Langford had knocked Wills out only 18 months before the Fulton fight, and Wills had some lackluster showings against Langford after the Fulton fight, including a draw. Wills might of course have been carrying Langford, to preserve his meal ticket latterly. I think that he very likely beats Fulton at this point. Here I have to disagree. Vitally Klitschko has shown us how effective Willard's unorthodox style can be in recent years. It proved that he could stop a man of that height and reach, who was not exceptionally durable, and do it rather easily. It did not prove that he could consistently out box such a man over fifteen rounds.
Rodel's manager told Willard that Rodel had a weak heart, and Willard eased up because he was terrified of killing him. When Willard found out that he had been double crossed, he punished Rodel in the rematch!