Valuev probably outpoints them. None of those guys were very good boxers but Valuev would have taken away the one and only thing the other two guys were used to having….. A size advantage..
Carnera and Willard were more talented and more proven. Carnera before he had his leg problems most likely stops Valuev. Willard would knock Valuev out.
If you look into the size of the fighters of Willards period he really wasn't used to having a size advantage especially not a big one. Guys with Willards size were relatively common in that era. For whatever reason the 1910s probably had the biggest average HWs of the first half of the 20th century. Valuev still wins. Just saying.
I would make both Willard and Carnera favorite over Valuev, albeit not by very much. They were both a bit more proven at this level.
Valuev was a better boxer than either of them and has the record to prove it. His earlier versions were also considerably more dynamic than the caramelized version we are familiar with. I think he outpoints them both in what would probably be a boring and slow fight.
That's interesting. Willard fought 31 times. Aside from Carl Morris, which of his opponents were either within 10lbs of him or heavier?
I see. Willard is listed as 6ft 6.5ins tall. You say he "wasn't used to having a size advantage, especially not a big one". Which of Willard's opponents were 6ft 4.5 ins or above, I.e. within 2 inches of or taller than him? There must be quite a few if he wasn't used to having a size advantage?
First off I admitted Valuev still wins. I think Valuev was one of the better alphabet champs of the 2000s. Upon further examination it appears Willards biggest opponent of note besides Morris was Firpo(6 ft 2.5) who beat him in the "battle of the giants". Though I think he had an exhibition with Fulton? I'll retract that part of the point. But HW in Willards time had at least 7 relevant fighters at 6 ft 3 or more and many more 6 ft 2ers(Max Baer sized) who Willard did fight. In the preceding 3 decades you had like 1 top HW 6 ft 3 or bigger a decade. In terms of a roster of big HWs you had 6 ft 6.5 Willard 6 ft 6 Fulton 6 ft 5 Andre Anderson 6 ft 4 Carl Morris 6 ft 3.5 Coffey 6 ft 3 Al Palzer 6 ft 3 Wells More importantly this group with the exception of Palzer all had considerably higher KO rates than Valuev with Coffey, Willard and Fultons being among the highest in the history of HW boxing. Valuev while huge was not a KO threat he was a point fighter at the top level and didn't even knockdown Haye, Chagaev, ancient Holyfield or John Ruiz. To the extent Willard ducked the giants of his era it was not just their size it was their power they were a fearsome bunch. In any case Carneras era was smaller at least at the top end. There was a similar number of guys 6 ft 3 or bigger but they were on average not as good as the group above. Guys like Phil Scott, Campolo, Hower, Retzlaff and Lasky. Interesting enough Carnera beat Campolo for the Super Heavyweight belt! I actually think Willards the worst of these 3. But his era was huge.
My post wasn't intended to criticise yours or to support Valuev in this fight, I don't make predictions in cross era fantasy fights, so no problem on that count. I was solely addressing your comment that Willard wasn't used to having a big size advantage, which fair play to you, you've now retracted. Even then, it was only because, Morris aside, I wasn't aware of Willard having fought anyone close to him in size, so only being familiar with Willard's most notable opponents, I.e. Dempsey, Johnson, Firpo, Moran and Morris, your comment piqued my interest/seemed unlikely to be true, hence the question/challenge.
