Prime Carnera vs Prime Willard Who wins

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Bummy Davis, Feb 26, 2010.


  1. Bummy Davis

    Bummy Davis Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    23,670
    2,155
    Aug 26, 2004
    These were the best big men to lace up until modern times of Bowe,Lewis and The Klitschkos...if you want throw Buddy Baer in there but I think Primo and Willard were tops till the 90's

    Who wins and how
     
  2. Russell

    Russell Loyal Member Full Member

    43,650
    13,049
    Apr 1, 2007
    I'd bet money on Willard. However lazy he came into the Dempsey fight he had a fighters mentality, more so then Primo anyway.

    Primo had just as much heart, but Willard just seems like more of a natural fighter to me, a guy who belongs in the ring more. Alongside being a better fighter who accomplished more, to boot.
     
  3. burt bienstock

    burt bienstock Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,285
    400
    Jan 22, 2010
    I think that the Jess Willard of the Jack Johnson fight in 1915,was a much better fighter than Carnera ever was...Willard bided his time in the Havana heat,letting the 37 yearold Johnson expend all his energy...Then in the 26th round hit Johnson with a powerul right cross ko'ing Johnson... Willard started boxing at a late age,and was lazy,but could beat Carnera easily at their best....
     
  4. Duodenum

    Duodenum Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,604
    290
    Apr 18, 2007
    Carnera would not be able to match jabs with Jess, who had considerably more snap on his punches. Willard could hit, had the better chin and stamina, and the uppercut to perform well inside. Fighting off the ropes, he ducked, blocked and countered Moran effectively. If the ideal temperament was lacking with Jess, the natural physical attributes and abilities certainly were in abundance. He was far more active defensively.

    When it came right down to it, Willard could hurt Primo without getting hurt in return.

    I would also bet money on Jess to prevail, over ten, 12, 15 rounds or more.
     
  5. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,598
    27,270
    Feb 15, 2006
    Willard packed more power and was a lot more durable.

    I would have to credit Carnera as being the better technician of the two and he was also more consistant. Carnera would never have turned up out of shape or taken a world level oponent lightly.

    In a shorter fight it is plausible that Carnera would outpoint Willard, especialy if Willard was not agressive in going after his man. A longer fight would tend to lead to a Willard stoppage. It is also conceivable that Willard could close the deal on Carnera in a shorter fight if he pressed the action.
     
  6. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,467
    Sep 7, 2008
    Carnera over a more 'modern' distance IMO. I think he can stay out of harms way long enough and maul Willards offence as I don't believe Willard was as all out aggressive as you need to be to get Carnera to find a way out.

    But if we go pre-Walker law than I'd say Willard would pace himself, wait for Carnera to be dieing on his legs than blast him with that straight right handn and take him out.
     
  7. he grant

    he grant Historian/Film Maker

    25,452
    9,437
    Jul 15, 2008
    Willard by KO ...this would look like Lennox Lewis v.s. Michael Grant ..
     
  8. TheGreatA

    TheGreatA Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,241
    157
    Mar 4, 2009
    10 or 12 rounds and I favour Carnera.
    15 rounds and it's anybody's fight.
    20 or more rounds and Willard should clearly be the favorite.
     
  9. he grant

    he grant Historian/Film Maker

    25,452
    9,437
    Jul 15, 2008
    Carnera would not enjoy the overwhelming physical advantages that allowed him to maximize his limited skills in a bout v.s. Willard ... Reach. strength, height will all be neutralized ... a serious Willard would tee off and pulverize him ...
     
  10. TheGreatA

    TheGreatA Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,241
    157
    Mar 4, 2009
    Carnera always did well against opponents his own size.

    6'8, 260 lb Ray Impellittiere TKO'd in 9 rounds
    6'10 224 lb Victorio Campolo KO'd in 2 rounds
    6'9, 250 lb Jose Santa TKO'd in 6 rounds

    As for Willard, he won a decision over 6'4, 235 lb Carl Morris but didn't fight any other opponents of similar stature.
     
  11. he grant

    he grant Historian/Film Maker

    25,452
    9,437
    Jul 15, 2008
    I do not think any of the three you mentioned were remotely in Willard's class ...

    Carnera's biggest wins, if they were even legit, were against the 6' Sharkey, the 5'10" Uz and the light heavyweight Loughran ... against all three his size was of primary importance.
     
  12. TheGreatA

    TheGreatA Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,241
    157
    Mar 4, 2009
    The same goes for Willard, except he struggled with and lost to light heavyweight-sized Tom McMahon and Gunboat Smith.
     
  13. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,598
    27,270
    Feb 15, 2006
    Impelittiere and Campollo were both ranked in the top 10 by Ring Magazine at one point and they both lost to Carnera, and indeed some smaller fighters that he beat.

    This tends to suggest that Carnera did not owe his sucess only to his size.
     
  14. OLD FOGEY

    OLD FOGEY Boxing Junkie Full Member

    7,670
    98
    Feb 18, 2006
    Neither has that impressive a record, but I think Willard tends to be overrated these days and Carnera unfairly dismissed. Carnera might not have been particularly fast compared to the better smaller heavies of history, but I do think he was quite a bit quicker than Willard, and a better boxer. I see him outpointing Willard over 15.
     
  15. djanders

    djanders Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,065
    6,932
    Feb 21, 2009
    This is about how I see it. :good