Can somebody explain to me why Wladimir Klitchsko is better than Jess Willard?

[kendom]

I'm struggling to rank Wlad ahead of him, I mean Willard actually threw uppercuts!- powerful enough to kill in the ring by the way, and not to mention greater stamina- being able to carry knockout power over 26 rounds, Willard also had a good jab and knew how to use his height and weight advantages- consider what his plan had been against Dempsey in their 1919 bout.

“He’ll come tearing at me, but I’m seventy, eighty pounds heavier than the boy. I’ll have my left out. He’ll have to watch for my left when he’s tearing in at me. Then I’ll hit him with a right uppercut. That will be the end.”

So the question is why should Klitchsko be seen as a better fighter than Jess Willard?

[JAB5239]

I'm struggling to rank Wlad ahead of him, I mean Willard actually threw uppercuts!- powerful enough to kill in the ring by the way, and not to mention greater stamina- being able to carry knockout power over 26 rounds, Willard also had a good jab and knew how to use his height and weight advantages- consider what his plan had been against Dempsey in their 1919 bout.

“He’ll come tearing at me, but I’m seventy, eighty pounds heavier than the boy. I’ll have my left out. He’ll have to watch for my left when he’s tearing in at me. Then I’ll hit him with a right uppercut. That will be the end.”

So the question is why should Klitchsko be seen as a better fighter than Jess Willard?

Willard is amongst the worst of the heavyweight champions with his career being short and inconsistent.

While I am on a Wlad bashing campaign the last few days he isn't as bad as I may have made seem to his nuthugging fans. He has a very good streak going and in spite of the weak era he has dominated in his defenses as well as any champion.

His style sucks and his fans are obnoxious, but Wlad is far better than Willard ever was.

[BattlingNelson]

Wlad is just waaayyys above Willard my man. Willard was slow as hell, had a non-exixting footwork and a porous defense. Luckily for him he had a great chin. Wlad has great footwork for such a big man and a piston-like jab.

You can argue that some HW's of the past could beat Wlad but certainly not Willard.

[StarshipTrooper]

Wlad is just waaayyys above Willard my man. Willard was slow as hell, had a non-exixting footwork and a porous defense. Luckily for him he had a great chin. Wlad has great footwork for such a big man and a piston-like jab.

You can argue that some HW's of the past could beat Wlad but certainly not Willard.

Wlad is no speed merchant either. His footwork may be precise but it's also slow and mechanical. His handspeed isn't any great shakes either.

That being said, Wlad DOES have a much better skill-set then Willard and is a much bigger puncher. Contary to popular belief Willard was NOT a big puncher. Strong, yes.....tough as hell, yes.....but not someone who could knock your brains out or have the skills to deliver it consistantly even if he did have the punching power.

The things Willard DID have over Wlad is his chin and stamina. I just don't see Willard being skilled enough for Wlad's chin to come into play.....Willard COULD land something wild and shatter Wlad's glass but like the Hail-Mary in football the odds are long against it.

Poet

[them_apples]

I'm struggling to rank Wlad ahead of him, I mean Willard actually threw uppercuts!- powerful enough to kill in the ring by the way, and not to mention greater stamina- being able to carry knockout power over 26 rounds, Willard also had a good jab and knew how to use his height and weight advantages- consider what his plan had been against Dempsey in their 1919 bout.

“He’ll come tearing at me, but I’m seventy, eighty pounds heavier than the boy. I’ll have my left out. He’ll have to watch for my left when he’s tearing in at me. Then I’ll hit him with a right uppercut. That will be the end.”

So the question is why should Klitchsko be seen as a better fighter than Jess Willard?

Wlad is better. He's quicker, more fundamental, more skill over all and is in better shape. Remember, surviving 26 rounds isn't the same and "going" all 26. Wlad would actually probably look better in a distance fight than Willard, whome would stand around taking breathers - panting heavily.

[kendom]

Wlad is no speed merchant either. His footwork may be precise but it's also slow and mechanical. His handspeed isn't any great shakes either.

That being said, Wlad DOES have a much better skill-set then Willard and is a much bigger puncher. Contary to popular belief Willard was NOT a big puncher. Strong, yes.....tough as hell, yes.....but not someone who could knock your brains out or have the skills to deliver it consistantly even if he did have the punching power.

The things Willard DID have over Wlad is his chin and stamina. I just don't see Willard being skilled enough for Wlad's chin to come into play.....Willard COULD land something wild and shatter Wlad's glass but like the Hail-Mary in football the odds are long against it.

Poet

He was a strong enough puncher to kill a man with an uppercut and carry knockout power to 26th round.

[StarshipTrooper]

He was a strong enough puncher to kill a man with an uppercut and carry knockout power to 26th round.

You don't have to be a big puncher to kill someone in the ring: Ask Ray Mancini and Emile Griffith. Add to that the very light gloves they where using back then.....

Poet

[kendom]

Wlad is better. He's quicker, more fundamental, more skill over all and is in better shape. Remember, surviving 26 rounds isn't the same and "going" all 26. Wlad would actually probably look better in a distance fight than Willard, whome would stand around taking breathers - panting heavily.

More skill in what department? infighting, bodypunching? and wasnt Wlad struggling to breathe in the first fight with Brewster? the fact that he was able to absorb punishment over 15 rounds and go on to win is a testamment to his stamina, not forgetting it was also an incredibly hot day and the fight was fought outdoors, how many fighters can take that kind of punishment and turn the tide to win in the 26th round.

[kendom]

Wlad is better. He's quicker, more fundamental, more skill over all and is in better shape. Remember, surviving 26 rounds isn't the same and "going" all 26. Wlad would actually probably look better in a distance fight than Willard, whome would stand around taking breathers - panting heavily.

You don't have to be a big puncher to kill someone in the ring: Ask Ray Mancini and Emile Griffith. Add to that the very light gloves they where using back then.....

Poet

Those were accumulated shots, Willard did it with a single punch, the fighter didnt die from brain injury he died from a broken neck. I think that any boxer capable of killing another with a single uppercut must have a lot of power.

[barfly12]

Willard was very tough

The Willard who beat Jack Johnson was a very strong, hard, durable man. Dempsey said Willard was very underrated as a puncher and even though he got wiped in Toledo against Dempsey, he had a great chin. Films of that era do not do him justice. Too close to call him and Klitch. Willard had been drinking a lot before the Dempsey fight and was a shadow of himself.