was fred fulton the best of the giants in his era?

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 19 Jan 2006, 18:54

do u think he was better than luther mccarty,morris, pelkey, jess willard, etc? was he the best of the giants in his era?

were do u rate fred fulton all time? top 75 heavyweight? top 50? how do u think he matches up vs some great contenders from other eras?

barry · Post by **barry** » 19 Jan 2006, 19:40

I'd say that he is possibly in the top 75, I've never tried to put together any lists over twenty.

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 22 Jan 2006, 18:22

Fulton was certainly better than Pelkey, who really wasn't that good at all.
He probably better than Morris. They fought 4 times, each won by disqualification and Fulton knocked out Morris twice.

If he was better than McCarty it is hard to say because of McCarty's tragic death so early. He may have gone on to be a great fighter, but we will never know.

Fulton may have been better than than Willard, that is debateable. As you probably know, Fulton had a lot of ups and downs.

As far as Fulton in the top 75, probably not. I have him at #91. However, you probably could make the case for him being being a little, or not even in the top 100.

He did have a cool nickname though. The "Rochester Plasterer".

perrycarter · Post by **perrycarter** » 22 Jan 2006, 19:09

Yeah, top 50-75 seems about right. He could have been champion if Jack Dempsey wasn't around, or Harry Wills for that matter. He was probably on par with Willard in terms of how good he was, but Willard is the "greater" fighter because he was champion and had bigger more high profile win(s).

He was better than the rest of the people that you mentioned. McCarty is like Ibeabuchi, he looked good but you can't really compare him to other fighters who actually had full careers.