Harry Wills record between 1916 and 1926

I don't intend to bash Wills, but how is retiring due to a broken hand and being disqualified "fluke" losses? Unless the DQ is very controversial, is it?

Many fighters have continued fighting and even won after breaking a hand. Tunney won a fight with the use of just his left, Gatti won a war with Ward after breaking his hand etc etc.

I don't think Wills should rank top ten. Top twenty is conceivable.

 

I think you would have to recognise that Dempsey was a lot more dominant against Firpo than Wills was.

 

Wills benefits in this analysis from the fact that he was fighting a lot of guys Dempsey foughtwhile green in his prime. If we cut the analysis down to the meat of the matter:



1. Fred Fulton---Dempsey ko 1--Wills ko 3

2. Gunboat Smith---Dempsey W 4, ko 2--Wills ko 1

3. Homer Smith---Dempsey ko 1--Wills W 10

4. Luis Angel Firpo---Dempsey ko 2--Wills W 12

5. Jack Sharkey---Dempsey ko 7--Wills lost on foul 13

totals Dempsey 6-0 with 5 knockouts

Wills 4-1 with 2 knockouts.

 

You might also want to take into acount the frequency with which Wills fought and the conditions he ocasionnaly had to fight under.

 

2 losses in a ten year span is very good. It is rare but other heavies have done it in the past. What Wills lacks in a win over a hall of fame caliber opponent when the opponent was in his prime. Wills best win is probably over a past his prime Langford. While the Dempsey fight was politically hamstrung, Wills could have meet hall of fame black heavyweight George Godfrey. Godfrey was big and strong. He could punch. Godfrey vs Wills would have been his career defining fight for both men.

I don't think Wills was as good as Lewis or Holmes.

 

No, not really, since it ended by a humiliating loss when he was still in his prime. Tyson was totally dominated by two opponents (Holyfield and Douglas) when in his prime or not too far removed from it. Holmes only lost to one man during a comparable period in his career and both times the losses were close and controversial. His loss to Tyson is more comparable to Tyson's loss against Lewis.

Personally I favour consistency over burning very brightly for a short time, and Wills seems to have done well in the former aspect.

 

You have a point, but Dempsey benefits by having Wills over 35 for the fights against Homer Smith, Firpo, and Sharkey.
I still think it is a stretch to give Dempsey the edge for winning 8 of 13 while Wills won 9 of 10.

 

The DQ against Tate impresses me as being flukish. If you knock your opponent out but lose, that is kind of flukish, I think.

As for the Johnson fight, Wills broke a wrist in the 2nd round. How much was he being paid? Wills was not getting a lot of money for this fight. To fight 10 or perhaps 20 rounds with a broken wrist would have risked his livelihood. He did not pull down huge purses which allowed him to lay off a long time. He had to fight every few weeks or so to keep money coming in to feed his family. I don't know how much we can second guess him on this one.

 

Agreed.

However, being knocked down twice and helped back into the ring by ringsiders and win by second round KO is not more impressive than a 12 round shutout decision, in my book.

 

Well, McVea was coming off a win over Langford. Langford, Jeannette, and Norfolk would all go on to beat top men and Hall-of-Famers. Months after losing to Wills, Langford ko'd Gunboat Smith, a top contender. We could debate if Langford, McVea, and Jeannette were in their primes--they were on the cusp of declining--but they were still formidable fighters. Norfolk was in his prime but a lightheavy. He was still good enough to beat Flowers, Siki, and Greb after losing to Wills.

I might ask, what Hall-of-Famer in his prime did Lewis or Holmes defeat?

Wills would have been 36 when he fought Godfrey and well past his best. It might have defined something for Godfrey and maybe not, but it would not mean much to me in placing Wills historically. Wills had been waiting for years to fight Dempsey. He had been promised Dempsey if he beat Firpo. I don't blame him myself for refusing to be side-tracked once again to fight Tunney or Godfrey or whomever Rickard dug up to try to knock him out of the top contender status.

 

These are the key fights that determined their standing at the time. The ones that counted.

Now Wills problem is that he was matching Dempseys wins but doing it in a lacklustre manner that did not grab the public imagination.

Some people here have suggested that Wills win over Firpo is better than Dempseys because the outcome was in no doubt and they have a point but Wills Firpo was seen as a snore fest while Dempsey Fipo was one of the most exciting fights in history.

Wills was great but unfortunately he had the wrong sort of greatness.

 

Yes leave in Wills shot to pieces loss and remvoe Dempseys pre-title fight loss :nono