Willard's worth as a champion?

I was reading something that related to this earlier, but I can't remember what it said.

I think it was an article dated January 1918, and it listed about eight contenders for a shot at Willard, good fighters apparently, but suggested they ought to fight an elimination tournament to prove themselves worthy of challenging him. It was quite positive about the state of the division.
Most articles mocked and bemoaned Willard for not fighting often, but most thought he'd be a tough champ to dethrone.

Some writers did think he sucked. Before, immediately after, and some time after he became champ.

 

People were critical of the division, but it was thought that Willard was probably the best of the bunch due to the paucity of good contenders.

The black dynamite crew were all thought to be washed up.

Fulton was regarded as being the best of the available contenders. To be fair to Willard, Moran seems to have been seen to be the second best around when Willard fought him. Later Morris, Levinsky and Dillon were but forward as potential challengers.

 

There was a little something going on called The Great War, also.

Willard was **** as a champion, and certainly his pre title run was nothing great. He was a gifted athlete, tho, strong and of great durability and stamina. He just didn't like boxing.

 

Wills built the best resume of the era from 1914 onwards eliminating Langford, Mcvey and Jeanette amongst others fighting them countless times. He went to Cuba to call out the Willard-Johnson winner but was stopped from doing so. The rest of the white contenders drew the colour line very early on and likely feared Wills

Yes, the money from a prospective Willard-Fulton bout was supposed to goto the Red Cross

 

Gunboat Smith* had a very good punch and at the start of their fight, he said he hit Willard with it perfectly.

"I think it wiggled his hair a bit" was Smith's comment. He was shocked at how Willard shrugged off his Sunday punch so nonchalantly. As memory serves, Smith was also daunted by Willard's power, as well as his great durability.

He said he realized he had no chance of slugging it out with Willard, and had to adjust his tactics and fight smart to win on points.




* This information is from his fantastic, rip-roaring interview in the wonderful book 'In This Corner'.

 

I agree with those who said he sucked.

I don't think he was that good of a fighter, just huge, and that he was far too inactive as champ.

 

meh, willard was what he was. discounting him entirely is unfair, building him up into a good/great fighter is disengenuous. he was a tall, durable farmboy with a good left hand. he was able to beat the little that was out there in the post johnson/pre dempsey era...provided he fought as little as possible. he outlasted an old apathetic johnson and was bludgeoned nearly to death by a peak dempsey who could pound on him while he was on his knees.

 

Black boxers simply didn't get much media attention because they were discriminated against. Langford too got little media attention, yet he's still considered the number 1 challenger to Johnson because like Wills he was the best with the best resume

The media seemingly wasn't that interested in boxing, which was still a controversial fledgling sport, during this period and didn't commentate much on it. World War 1 saw boxing more of accepted legal sport and more promoters built up big events after that time, which in turn fueled the media interest in the sport

Still Fulton was talked about as a challenger as early as 1915, as was Morris, Carpentier was talked about too. The boxers were expected to give their earnings to war relief funds for these fights, which maybe 1 reason they didn't come off

Bottom line is Wills fought all comers 1913 onwards beating every man he faced, most of the white contenders drew the colour line against Wills. Meanwhile Willard seemingly held the title hostage while talking retirement waiting for the biggest offer to sell off his title. Willard literally earned money as a circus act, even buying his own circus. Astute business but as he considered the best? The Chairman of the boxing commision thought Langford/McVea would beat Willard as late as 1916

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F10711F8395512738FDDA10A94DB405B868DF1D3

 

The press seemed to be way more impressed with Langford than Wills.
Langford was a living legend.
And the press had been extensively covering boxing for decades, certainly when it came to anything related to the heavyweight championship and its contenders.

 

He was a placeholder in a poor time who wanted to fight about as much as Johnson did by the late stage. Maybe even less. He was there taking advantage of the fact that he was a very big, tough guy who could put in the work to get there at a time when that's exactly what it took. If I'm not mistaken, he never would've chosen to fight with as good an economical option elsewhere. He just didn't have the personality to be hungry for it. The result is what we got as far as his championship exploits, or lack thereof.

 

He had a travelling rodeo show. He cashed in pretty well for an uncharismatic champion. I think he earned it.