Willard vs Patterson

I'm not sure Spinks beats Patterson, though he might be more suited to fighting giants.

 

You are referring to the bizarre incident with Joe Cox early in his career presumably.

 

"quit against Firpo"

On the film Firpo gets him in a corner and hits him with several punches. Willard goes down and can't get his legs under him. I don't see this as quitting. I think it was an older fighter getting knocked out.

Who knows how much this version of Willard had left. He was certainly a much tougher fighter in 1915.

 

I admire Willard for getting off the floor as many times as he did against Dempsey, equally as much as I admire frazier for getting up as any times as he did in the first Foreman fight.

 

"Vitali Klitschko"

I can't imagine Patterson having any success at all with Vitali Klitschko either, so I think the point is rather weak.

 

I understand where all the pro-Patterson folks are coming from. Boxing had made a lot of progress in 40 years. p4p and inch4inch Patterson was much better,

but he was about 7" shorter, and 50 to 60 pounds lighter, against a man who had stamina and durability.

Willard had some awful performances, but in fairness won the title by beating a dominant champion, even if Johnson was 37.

Patterson won the title by beating a man who had been beaten badly by the retired champion and was 39 himself. Patterson proceeded to avoid the best out there except perhaps for the hard to gauge Johansson. When he finally got in against an unquestionably formidable heavyweight in Liston, he couldn't have performed worse, going out for the count twice in the first round.

When focused, I don't think Willard was as bad as he must have appeared in his worst performances. Sheer size, strength, and having the right punch to deal with Floyd tips the balance for me.

I can certainly imagine Floyd out-speeding him, but on balance I think Willard is the better pick.

*And the bottom line is I don't judge Patterson as good as many others do.