Why do you guys post turn of the century greats against modern fighters

He faced faced just about every type of fighter over 15 rounds.

25 rounds is a different ball game and we can never really know how he would adapt to it.

It comes down to what is going to give first.

 

I think you sound far too sure of that considering there's no film of him.

Personallly, I think you're dead wrong as well. Foster and Patterson would probably be monsters against Fitz´ opponents, seeing how they were against guys that size some 50-60 years later. They did nothing to Ali and not much to his opponents. But somehow Fitz would, just because contemprorary reports speak very highly of him?

Let's say Foster had been active in an era where they were no really skilled guys at 190 lbs upwards. He would have come off as nigh unbeatable. His KO's of Flowers etc would be used by many as examples of how he would been able to dent just about every chin.

The difference between him and Fitz, is mostly that Foster did square off against 200+ lbs guys with solid boxing skills and we know he fell well short when he did. That his punches all of a sudden had little impact.

Spinks, another murderous LHW puncher, actually put on lots of muscle before moving up, but his power still didn't carrry against guys at 210-220 lbs.

Same with RJJ. A brutal puncher at LHW, put on 15-20 lbs of pure muscle to fight a 220 lbs guy. He teed off on him at will at times, without ever having him in serious trouble.

Why on earth would guys like Fitz prove to be so different?

 

Who else is like Fitz?

Choynski, maybe, but i cant think of any others.