I'll go with Bobby Fitz based on his higher weight accomplishments..... Ketchel is mainly a notable middleweight who fought anybody around, but Fitz prolly had better skill....... Fitz beats Ketchel......... MR.BILL
Remember that Ketchel could punch too. He was a devastating puncher in fact. Couple that with his temperment/fighting style and you've got yourself a candidate for fight of the century(no exaggeration). With that said , I do believe Fitz does have the superior boxing pedigree and would touch Ketchel with ease ...it would by no means be an easy victory. Pure action baby!!!!
I admire Stanley Ketchel a lot but I'm sure Fitz would win that one. Bigger, stronger, better skills but still... no way it would be an easy fight for him - there's no easy fights against boxers like Ketchel.
Hard to say for sure with so little footage of either one, but from what I've seen and read of Fitz, he seems to have been the better all-around fighter. On the basis of that, I'd give him the edge in this.
Most of todays boxing devotees,do'nt realize what a force Ruy Robert Fitz was in his prime...Think of this...When at the age of 31,and weighing about 160-165 pounds, he kod,such top 200pounders,asPeter Maher,Dan Creedon,Gus Ruhlin,Ed Dunkhorst,[300 lbs],Powerful Tom Sharkey, etc...At the late age Fitz ko,d Jim Corbett,for the title,than in 1902, at the age of39 years old battered,220 lb champ James J Jeffries for seven rounds, before the giant ,27 year old Jeffries ko'd Fitz'....Question, what would a 25 year old Fitz at 165 lbs do today?Fitz,"A fighting Machine On Stilts".....
Burton, I too love ole Bobby Fitz, but let's not make the guy out as being able to KO King Kong in the middle of the jungle......... We have barely any films; only tales and writings about the man..... I know he was great and that he deserves his ink on paper, but it pains me when historians and intellects always wanna bring up how he KO'd giants and men the size of buildings, etc..... No doubt he was great for the late 19th century and early 20th century, but stylistically speaking, he'd prolly get murdered by many of today's technically gifted pro's between 160 to 200 pounds........ :hat MR.BILL
This is all it comes down to. Fitzsimmons is far more likely to land the punchers that matter because he's a far better all-round puncher. Superior accuracy and timing with the power to match only means one thing, Ketchel is going down for the count.
Lets put it this way: I am certain that he was the most dangerous puncher of the heavyweight champions between Sullivan and Dempsey. I think he was the most dangerous heavyweight puncher full stop, between John L Sullivan and Sam Langford. That period takes in a verry big talent pool with a lot of heaqvyweights of all shapes and sizes.
Fitz was a pin point power puncher with a proven track record against rated heavyweights .Ketchel was a swinger a, let it all hang out, devastating middelweight puncher . Fitz kos Stan.