Compare resumes: Mayweather to Harry Wills

[billeau2]

So lets just say for the sake of a general comparison: Wills beat some of the premier Black Fighters that came up to fight heavyweight. Wills confounds the issue, as he lost to Sharkey and some other fighters that Dempsey beat... BUT we can say that his resume was at least the equal of jack's... I would personally say, as I told Travesty, that I would go one better and say given that he beat McVea, langford and Jeanette, despite some spotty fights...that his resume was BETTER than Jack's!

I still think Dempsey would beat him handily... But that is another issue.

Heres the point: Comparing Wills to Mayweather we can lose some of the Dempsey baggage.

Does it make any more sense to anyone? Comparing Wills? who has resume points over Jack, to a fighter who was best at 130ish? and extended his wins to welter and middle weight? (a fairly regular trajectory. I like Will's better as a comparison than Jack, because he beat some ATG great fighters... BUT his record against the same average competition as Jack shows us something! Wills lost a lot! What does that tell us?

Could it be that excellent fighters (not ATG fighters) like Sharkey, Paulino, Tate, were very good? Could it be that there was a general level of competence in the heavyweights that does not show itself the same way as in other divisions... were in the lower weight divisions, statistically you had usually, at least a few prime ATG's in the division at all times?

Comparing great fighters is more than who they beat, but it matters more, or less depending on the division you fought in... Dempsey to some ducked great Black Fighters... But, regardless, it is a moot point...you can show me many great heavyweights who never fought a fellow ATG at prime... heavyweights like Liston, who fought workmanlike fighters with talent, like Williams, Marshall, Patterson, etc... Liston did not duck Black fighters lol.

The proof is in the pudding: We would not see a resume for most fighters in the lower weight divisions who are considered great, that did not involve competing against at least one other ATG.

There is a reason for this folks: And hopefully this thread can make that point which i have failed to make clear... ditto for this comparison.

[ShoulderRoll]

Wow, what a daring stance. You're really going out on a limb there by saying that his resume might be better than Jack's.

Harry Wills fought the great Sam Langford multiple times. That alone would trump most of Dempsey's ledger outside of his losses to Tunney.

[billeau2]

Wow, what a daring stance. You're really going out on a limb there by saying that his resume might be better than Jack's.

Harry Wills fought the great Sam Langford multiple times. That alone would trump most of Dempsey's ledger outside of his losses to Tunney.

He lost to Sharkey and at least one other opponent Jack beat... so that had to be figured in, also? while both drank from the same well (same general competition) I frankly do not know exactly who fought the general better fighters on a name, by name, basis... so yeah I did not just assume Wills had the better resume.

Also, fighting the same opponent many times is a different situation. Much as it might pain you? It has to be looked at slightly differently.

But yeah, in the end I gave it to Wills... So what is your beef? Did it make you emotional due to the time of month that I did it my way? Here is a napkin, want to cry on my shoulder a bit?:

And I did this thread to clarify, not to cause you to cry!

[travestyny]

He lost to Sharkey and at least one other opponent Jack beat... so that had to be figured in, also? while both drank from the same well (same general competition) I frankly do not know exactly who fought the general better fighters on a name, by name, basis... so yeah I did not just assume Wills had the better resume.

Also, fighting the same opponent many times is a different situation. Much as it might pain you? It has to be looked at slightly differently.

But yeah, in the end I gave it to Wills... So what is your beef? Did it make you emotional due to the time of month that I did it my way? Here is a napkin, want to cry on my shoulder a bit?:

And I did this thread to clarify, not to cause you to cry!

I dunno, bruh. I only know of Wills losing to Sharkey that Dempsey beat. Wills also beat Meehan, who Dempsey went 1-2-2 with. And he also beat John Lester Johnson three times out of three bouts, who drew with Dempsey but even Dempsey went on record saying he believes he lost after Johnson broke three of his ribs.

I also don't know that I'd say Wills lost a lot. He lost 10 times:
twice by 1st round disqualification, once when stopping an uppercut caused him to retire with a broken wrist in the 2nd round, twice to Langford, and twice to McVey.

That only leaves 3 other losses. Twice in the twilight of his career, and once very early in his career.

Incidentally, it seems Boxrec has his DOB incorrect. Seems he was born in 1889 as opposed to 1892. That means he was 37 years old when he lost to Sharkey.


I may visit his grave being that he's buried in the Bronx.

R.I.P. Champ.

[Marchegiano]

I think he needs Dempsey to topple Mayweather.

[GhostofDempsey]

It is very difficult to compare fighters of different eras, especially when they are nearly a century apart. Especially when comparing heavyweights to the lighter weight classes. Part of what goes into a resume is how each fighter challenged themselves and whether or not those “big names” on their resume were at their best. While Wills may not have been as good a boxer as Mayweather, he did fight the best versions of opponents he fought. Mayweather never fought the best version of any fighter considered elite during his era.

[billeau2]

I dunno, bruh. I only know of Wills losing to Sharkey that Dempsey beat. Wills also beat Meehan, who Dempsey went 1-2-2 with. And he also beat John Lester Johnson three times out of three bouts, who drew with Dempsey but even Dempsey went on record saying he believes he lost after Johnson broke three of his ribs.

I also don't know that I'd say Wills lost a lot. He lost 10 times:
twice by 1st round disqualification, once when stopping an uppercut caused him to retire with a broken wrist in the 2nd round, twice to Langford, and twice to McVey.

That only leaves 3 other losses. Twice in the twilight of his career, and once very early in his career.

Incidentally, it seems Boxrec has his DOB incorrect. Seems he was born in 1889 as opposed to 1892. That means he was 37 years old when he lost to Sharkey.


I may visit his grave being that he's buried in the Bronx.

R.I.P. Champ.

I didn't look at all their common opponents, just know the crazy dude that Dempsey was thrown from the ring, Will's lost to...The bull of pompas. We have to be careful qualifying any loss, unless we qualify every loss, by both men, if you know what I mean...Like "Dempsey lost because of a long count for Tunney" yada yada... (not saying it is true). or, that Only Genete was a bona fide heavy weight...

The point stands that Wills had a better resume than Dempsey.

[billeau2]

It is very difficult to compare fighters of different eras, especially when they are nearly a century apart. Especially when comparing heavyweights to the lighter weight classes. Part of what goes into a resume is how each fighter challenged themselves and whether or not those “big names” on their resume were at their best. While Wills may not have been as good a boxer as Mayweather, he did fight the best versions of opponents he fought. Mayweather never fought the best version of any fighter considered elite during his era.

Valid point...

[ShoulderRoll]

Mayweather never fought the best version of any fighter considered elite during his era.

Invalid point.

He fought prime Jose Luis Castillo. Twice. Just to give one example.

[travestyny]

I didn't look at all their common opponents, just know the crazy dude that Dempsey was thrown from the ring, Will's lost to...The bull of pompas. We have to be careful qualifying any loss, unless we qualify every loss, by both men, if you know what I mean...Like "Dempsey lost because of a long count for Tunney" yada yada... (not saying it is true). or, that Only Genete was a bona fide heavy weight...

The point stands that Wills had a better resume than Dempsey.

You mean Firpo? Wills didn't lose to Firpo. Reports had Wills winning every round, and he also dropped Firpo in round 2.