I strongly disagree with this opinion, but I'm not a boxing expert. Let's see what you thinm about it.
I don't see even a slight resemblance TBH Fitz was a very accurate punch picker and a clinical finisher.Wilder is a frantic swinger when he unloads, one of the sloppiest finishers I've seen he more resembles Max Baer.
I don't see it either, Fitz was a great tactician who changed his strategy in every fight, he was also ultimate body puncher with two-handed power. Wilder doesn't have any variety in his attacks outside of powerful overhand right and lazy jab - no body punching and very badic style. I had quite a long discussion about it in another thread though, so I decided to create a new thread.
There are a few parallels, but comparing Fitz to Wilder is like comparing Ali to Hughie Fury. I'll largely repost what I said in the other thread. Fitz nearly always got his stoppages with multiple punches to both body and head. While he certainly hit him to the body, in their first fight with Sharkey he hit him with more to the head, and had Sharkey pretty concussed. Fitz had way more punch variety than Wilder. He also had way better footwork, being able to fight on the front and back foot. Wilder has no clue how to actually press as shown in the Fury fight. Wilder has never shown anything like the in and out attacks Fitz used on Jeffries. His defence looks awkward because the gloves necessitate a different style of defence. Try and use a modern guard back then and they'd punch through it while laughing at you. You have to block the arms or slip much more. Of course he had trouble with Corbett, you're always going to when fighting someone that fast when you have to defend with reflexes. In fights such as against Maher and Gardner he showed much better defence, and he had nothing like the massive reach advantage Wilder had against Stiverne. Or against Dempsey when he finished after 13 rounds unmarked while Dempsey needed painkillers to sleep.
Seriously? Wilder's not a clinical finisher? He's literally stopped EVERYONE he's fought except for Fury, who he had down twice, right? And you know Fitz wasn't a wild swinger because you've studied HOW MANY OF HIS 57 KOs exactly? Or you "know" based on someone told someone who told someone who read 120 year old newspaper clippings? If the only film of Wilder stopping someone was the Breazeale fight, people would think he was the most clinical finisher of all time. This is why I rarely get into pioneer discussions. People can watch practically every fight any modern boxer has had, and people see a couple minutes of a pioneer and base the rest on hyperbolic hearsay.
Seriously? Your thread was who was the most stylistically close to Fitz. You said KEN NORTON. I said Wilder. Wilder is the CLOSEST. NOT A MIRROR IMAGE. Closest. For many reasons. Which I explained several times. You couldn't find a single person who could tell you directly who was most like Fitz. Now it seems you started a whole thread to bash my choice. Should i start a new thread asking if Ken Norton resembles Bob Fitzsimmons? What a jerk/troll move, man. Honestly. I'm out.
I said that they had similar approach in attacking the body. I never said they are similar in terms of visual experience.
Not enough clean film on Fitz for me. Also Fitz punished guys in the heart and solar plexus unmercifully from what I've read.
Yeah and I've never seen Wilder even trying it. There is much more complex methods behind Fitzsimmons style than simple Wilder attacks.
There is some (small sample) footage of Fitz as well as tons of articles about him. He also wrote a manual.
