Here is a short article from when Burns withdrew the fight, suggeting there was not much demand for Fulton Willard. http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/l...lton&y=0&x=0&dateFilterType=yearRange&index=0 Willard was certainly confident. He wanted to schedule a Moran fight a couple of days after the Fulton fight. http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/l...lton&y=0&x=0&dateFilterType=yearRange&index=3 Here is an excellent comparison article. Quite interesting that Willard seems to have been considered the stronger and bigger hitter. I actually had always imagined the opposite. Also interesting comparison of common opponents which gives Fulton a pretty big advantage. http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/l...lton&y=0&x=0&dateFilterType=yearRange&index=5
I find it interesting how highly rated Willard was in his day. Even given dempseys barnstorming run to the title, fultons domination of the coloured champion Langford, Willard still remained a healthy favourite over both. Was he the first hw to kill a man in the ring and did this make his legend somewhat more dramatic?
I couldnt find the link anywhere, and havent the time to look, but i have previously seen a good article talking about his invincibility. I think it was his sheer size that bluffed people into thinking that he would never lose anohter fight. He was a true superheavyweight, but with Modern skills. This should seem familiar to modern fans. Most think he was untouchable with his reach and he would simply keep any opponents at bay with his jab, because size matters and we have weight divisions for a reason. The problem is that any chin is dentable and it is only a matter of time before someone comes along and beats anyone. Inactivity obviously didnt help.
Two men died after being in the ring with Fitzsimmons. Walter Croot died after fighting Jimmy Barry in 1897. Boxers have died from ring activity since Roman times.