I agree with those who don't rate Willard highly among the HW title holders of years gone by, but do believe that although he was no master boxer, he better skills than some let on. Even the Willard who took on dempsey was able to absorb a tremendous beating and continue past that first rd. through the 3rd, and don't believe Wlad would (although he probably could) would take him any earlier than that due to his style. I would picture Wlad to paitently use his jab and superior skills, to lay a one sided beating on Williard. I am not sure about a stoppage, but could certainly see Willard not being able to continue or having a ref step in and save him from more damage. bad night for Jess, who absorbs a less intense beating than Dempesy gave him, but maybe one of the most methodical beatings in history. WIDE UD or late stoppage
Dempsey was making an absolute fortune from appearances and films , thats why he was inactive.Willard was rather sluggish by nature and disliked the training I think.
Of course, Wladimir would know about the 20 round distance in advance and would train accordingly. Under those circumstances, I would pick Wladimir Klitschko over Jess Willard by a 20 round decision win.
I don´t rate Willard highly but he has some things going for him in there. Wlad would have no real size and reach advantage. Willard would have better stamina and workrate, at least as good power, a far better chin and a good jab himself. I totally can see a determinated Willard taking Wlad´s best and taking out a tiring Wlad late. The chance of a methodical breakdown of Jess by the hands of Wlad is as possible though. Normally, I back Wlad on classic. I don´t think this one is as easy or clear for him as others see it. Willard wasn´t great but he has the tools to beat WK.
I think Fred Fulton was a lot better than Willard, comparing the two big HWs of the day. Of course Willis was probably better than either of them.
Seriously, Wlad is five echelons above what Willard provided in the ring. There was no equivalent of a WK in 1916, yet Willard went the paces with the type of Moran. And I am one who rank Willard higher than most. This fight would be an absolute slaughter.
Five Echelons? We all know that physically, they are similar size. Style wise, Willard is more similar to Wlad, although i noted from Wlads last display that when Wlad starts to become more offensive, he adopst more of a jess Willard stance. As big and strong (and he was frightfully strong and hard hitting) as Willard was, i do think that Wlad is equally as hard hitting, although both can hurt each other. Theoretically, Wlad should not get gassed, as he is as fit as they come, but he does seem to have a bit of a problem when he is hit and i tend to think that it is more a chin problem than a fitness thing. I dont see the 20 rounds really coming into too much play, other than the fact that it gives Willard an extra 8 rounds to land up big on Wlad. There is no way that there is five echelons between these two, and Willard has a live chance of landing big and winning the fight by KO. I think that Willard presents a far bigger challenge to Wlad than Say Valuev (who i wouldnt mind seeing fight him), Povetkin, and many of Wlad's previous victims. I think Wlad's best win is probably Chris Byrd twice, and i think that Willard beats him just as easily.
Seriously. I think this is a 50-50 match, or in other words, I dont care to see these two lumbering behemoths plod around for 20 rounds and bother rendering a decision. Wladimir boxes better, but Willard was tougher, took a punch better. Maybe the fight should be : 1. winner-takes-all 2. no decision will be rendered 3. The purse money decreases for every round it goes on past the 1st. Those stipulations might actually make the bums do some fighting, make the fight worth watching.
I agree Wlad is above Willard in terms of skill but Willard has the right tools to beat him. You are a bit harsh describing them as bums, even though you are right on the fight probably beeing a stinker.
You're right. I am harsh. I actually think they are/were both very good boxers. Willard is especially underrated. And Wladimir can be brilliant is his dominating his opponents. But both men are boring to watch, throw too few punches and are guaranteed to reduce the prospects of us seeing a real fight. "Bums" is unfair, but these type of fighters are frustrating.
Well, I can see why most people label Wlad boring, I can´t disagree. But over here sport is not entertainment. We admire them for their performances and achievements no matter how entertaining they are. That´s why we can admire fighters that are labled as boring from the Anglo-American world. Add to that a nice and humble personality and fighters are loved here, no matter where they are from. Of course entertaining fighters are even more loved.