Thank Goodness good ol' Stoney is around to make this interesting. I've not even watched any Willard fights apart from the one he gets his head kicked in and a few clips against Johnson.
Ruiz wasn't an easy guy to catch due to his spoiling tactics. For his part, he could jab, clinch, and limit the action. I can't stand Ruiz, but he is good at a few things. Willard was horrible on defense, and rather clumsy on offense. He was out boxed a few times, but guys who were not as good as Ruiz. Ruiz was not stopped often. I see Ruiz taking a decision here, even though I wish Willard would land a KO blow.
There are also a lot of differences. Vitlai moves around better, throws more punches, is more accurate, harder to hit because he has a defense ( Willard had next to none ). Willard could be out boxed, and was. Vitlai never was behind on any score card after three rounds in all of his fights. HUGE differences here.
It's fun seeing the high school mentality at work .. maybe we'll hear soon about how astonishing the 37 year old version of Joe Louis was ...
I like Vitali, he is one of my favorites today but I see a lot of similarities in style. Vitali had a more extensive amateur career and has had a great run despite losing 4 prime years. I also do not think Willard was as bad as you say and may have been a stronger fighter today with modern training and know-how of the history's of heavyweight boxing. What did have behind him 15-20 years of glove fighting as a resource. The game was new.
And Tyrell Biggs was really similar stylistically to Muhammad Ali. And that's where the comparisons stop.
You add much needed logic and humor to this forum. Correct you are. What surprises me on this poll is many pick Willard via decision. If you pick Willard, I think him winning via KO is more likely. Simply stated Willard wasn't very skilled.