Jess Willard vs Archie Moore

Nino Valdez x2
Bob Baker
Clarence Henry
Abel Cestac
Embrell Davidson
Jimmy Bivins
Jimmy Slade
Curtis Shepard
Harold Johnson
Bob Satterfield
To name a few

 

I see.

 

I favour Archie Moore.
I think Jess Willard was a decent fighter, tall with a good punch and stamina. He wasn't that special, though. There are no: The Ring Magazine's Annual Ratings and no National Boxing Association's Quarterly Ratings about Willard's time. There are BoxRec's Annual Ratings though. I know it is disputed, but it is better than nothing and it doesn't have to be so accurate to give a general overview over the best boxers. Willard has never beaten a boxer, who was top ranked at the time. He himself is only ranked twice: 1913 and 1915 as number 10. He was quite inactive as worldchampion, has beaten an old, unmotivated, over the hill Jack Johnson in the heat of Havana (still would lose on points after 12 or 15 rounds).
On the other hand Archie Moore. One of the greatest light heavyweight champions of alltime. He fought in more modern times with much better conditions for black boxers. He has beaten top heavyweights like Nino Valdes, Bob Baker and Clarence Henry, which could be excellent and dangerous title challengers for Rocky Marciano.

 

Jess Willard UD/KO