BoxRec

Two of the superheavyweight champs over 15 rounds!

After Recovering from a couple of knockdowns I'd pick Carnera to outbox him with his superior jab and movement.

I'd strongly disagree Carnera had a superior jab.

Willard by UD. Vs the taller Impelltierre Primo couldn't do his typical distance fight, so he went to slug away. If he does that vs Willard he's going to get badly hurt.

Not that I think highly of Carnera's jab I just think lowly of Willard's . As I depart from the old written accounts of boxing and check the film I notice Willard with a flatfooted lunging jab from the hip. While I noticed Carnera to step in with it displaying more technique .

I think Willard gets overly criticised and is underrated. He was not one of the greatest champs but he often gets lumped with being one of the worst. Unfairly I think.

Edit read the post wrong

I think it comes down to all-around ability vs conditioning.

Willard, by his own admission, wasn't the most sound boxer. His tactic was to throw jabs, to keep men and bay, and if they came close he threw an uppercut. Outside of that, he clinched and mauled. He did go 26 rounds with an older, slower, inactive Jack Johnson under 110 degree heat in the shade in Cuba. And, he took the worst beating in heavyweight history from Jack Dempsey. He was well conditioned and tough as they came. He was the taller of the two men, and with a longer reach. He was quite possibly the strongest heavyweight champion, outside of Carnera, for he was allegedly capable of lifting and tossing 500 pound bales of cotton.

Carnera, on the other hand, threw alot of jabs, and for a man 6'5" 275 he was rather light on his feet. He had greater ring generalship than Willard. And he had more apparent skills. He was also, in my view, as tough as Willard, if not tougher in regards. When I look at film of him facing Max Baer, and how he took Baer's body punches as if they were nothing--- it gives me pause to wonder, out of the two men who was the more courageous. His kayo of Sharkey, I've always believed to of been legit, because Carnera turned his body weight into that shot and hit Sharkey flush--- and the power behind that shot, shows Carnera did have some major pop to his punches when he was in the right position to do so, because Sharkey flew up into the air like a Popeye cartoon.

The one thing these two men, also had in common, was the fact that they killed someone in the ring. For Willard, it was against a prospect white hope named 'Wild' Bull Young. Willard apparently broke his neck with a tremendous uppercut. For a long time, however, it was thought to of been the result of a punch to Young's heart area--- and a film serial entitled "The Heart Punch" was seen throughout theatres in the country, showing Willard's power. Carnera, on the other hand, fought long standing contender Ernie Schaaf, and the man fell over dead after being hit with a right hand. Unbeknownst to Carnera, Schaaf had recently suffered from meningitis and his death was caused more from this than Carnera's punches--- however, from that time onward, Carnera never displayed the sort of drive or aggression in the ring as he once did, prior to facing Schaaf.

Strangely enough, though, for all their size and strength--- these two men had relatively low knockout percentages. Most of Willard's fights were no-decisions, and because of this he was initially written off as being the best white hope in the world--- only the death of Luther McCarty brought Willard's name back into the spotlight. Carnera, despite outweighing men by as much as 80 pounds, also had a low kayo percentage--- this was more likely due to his excessive muscularity, which robbed him of the much needed fluidity a boxer needs to score kayos. Most of his kayos came against hand picked journeymen and flat out tomato cans, during Carnera's initial American tour.

To break it all down--- if you were to ask me who would win, I would more than likely lean toward Primo Carnera, only for the simple fact that he had more fights, over a longer period of time, against a higher caliber of opposition, than Willard did. Carnera was also more developed as a boxer, and his fitness was insane for a man of his size and bulk. I believe, he would of out worked Willard. I point out two fights as evidence: Carnera's wins over Ray Impelltierre and Jose Santa, both were between 6'8" and 6'9" in height and weighed between 240-250 pounds. He proved to be the best "giant" of his day. Jess Willard--- who lost to McCarty and other behemoths, or could only manage no-decisions, wasnt able to do that.

As long as the right money got into the right Hands....I will agree with HH.

However, if the recipients miss the drop, or if Willard decides he's going to fight his best and let the chips fall where they may......then I'm afraid Carnera would be the chip that falls.

HomicideHenry wrote:
To break it all down--- if you were to ask me who would win, I would more than likely lean toward Primo Carnera, only for the simple fact that he had more fights, over a longer period of time, against a higher caliber of opposition, than Willard did. Carnera was also more developed as a boxer, and his fitness was insane for a man of his size and bulk. I believe, he would of out worked Willard. I point out two fights as evidence: Carnera's wins over Ray Impelltierre and Jose Santa, both were between 6'8" and 6'9" in height and weighed between 240-250 pounds. He proved to be the best "giant" of his day. Jess Willard--- who lost to McCarty and other behemoths, or could only manage no-decisions, wasnt able to do that.

Willard didn't lose to McCarty . . newspapers either scored it a draw or a win for Willard. Willard also beat the other big heavyweights he faced including Morris, Daily, and Miller. The guys he lost to were closer to being light heavyweights than weighing 200 lbs (McMahon, Smith, Dempsey). And one should note of those losses, the Smith fight was extremely close (and Smith was one of the top 5 HWs at that time and was far more experienced) and vs McMahon he was a late sub and grossly out of condition.

Willard vs Johnson and Moran shows me a strong snappy power jab a la Foreman. Carnera's jab could be quick but carried little power (he also 'pushed' it out too much). As for throwing it from the waist . . so does Vitali.

dempseyfire wrote:
Willard didn't lose to McCarty . . newspapers either scored it a draw or a win for Willard. Willard also beat the other big heavyweights he faced including Morris, Daily, and Miller. The guys he lost to were closer to being light heavyweights than weighing 200 lbs (McMahon, Smith, Dempsey). And one should note of those losses, the Smith fight was extremely close (and Smith was one of the top 5 HWs at that time and was far more experienced) and vs McMahon he was a late sub and grossly out of condition.
Willard vs Johnson and Moran shows me a strong snappy power jab a la Foreman. Carnera's jab could be quick but carried little power (he also 'pushed' it out too much). As for throwing it from the waist . . so does Vitali.

Jess Willard was not considered the top man of his day. Period. It was McCarty who won the "White Heavyweight Championship", and Willard simply was not as technically gifted or sound a boxer as McCarty was. I'm not speaking from personal bias because the man came from where I was born, but from the fact virtually every newspaper of the day heralded McCarty as the best of the lot, the man with the best chance of beating Johnson. Unlike men such as Willard, McCarty had great foot movement and put together good combinations--- being 6'4" and 220 pounds, he was essentially a modern heavyweight in a pre-modern era. In less than two years he amassed a million dollars (in today's money) and had made the rest of the field look inept.

Atm my computer is being a real pain in the ass, as it keeps freezing, but I will post several articles to attest to the fact that McCarty--- not Willard--- was considered the best. It was won by both merit, and public opinion because McCarty was entertaining as he was skilled and Willard was not. I will agree Willard to be second best, for he was certainly the strongest and perhaps the biggest (of the successful contenders) white hope in the country, and was the toughest and best conditioned. However, he was very slow and limited--- his chief offense was a jab followed by an uppercut. And when that failed, he clinched and put his weight on opponents, or attempted to push them away.

BoxBuzz wrote:As long as the right money got into the right Hands....I will agree with HH.

However, if the recipients miss the drop, or if Willard decides he's going to fight his best and let the chips fall where they may......then I'm afraid Carnera would be the chip that falls.

I will not argue this topic again, as I did months ago, at length. All I will say is no manufactured fighter, whose career was built completely on dives and tomato cans, could have taken a beating from Max Baer for eleven rounds, Joe Louis for six rounds, let alone of beaten legitimate contenders in Loughran and Uzcudon. Unless you want to somehow believe/argue that Baer and Louis were pulling punches, or that Loughran and Uzcudon were either bought off or they were simply too small to handle Carnera--- which is a ridiculous proposition, because a giant man who didn't have a clue, would of been made mince meat by even a middleweight boxer of talent.

SugahRay Robitussen wrote:Hey HH,

Did you know that Jess Willard(like James J. Jeffries) also has roots in the state of Ohio?
I seem to remember reading a newspaper article shortly after he won the championship in April 1915,
that it said one of his parents was from Ohio and the other from Kentucky I believe.
I dont remember from whereabouts in Ohio his parent was from.

Kansas where he grew up in the 1880's and 1890's was still pretty much
the Western frontier(minus the Buffalo herds).

The last recorded wild Bison killed in the state of Kansas
was in 1879 ,it was killed at Point of Rocks (along the old Santa Fe Trail)near Elkhart,Morton County Kansas.
(in the far Southwestern corner of the state).

Never knew that of Willard, but did know Jeffries was Ohio-born (Carroll).

It could have been a fun fight of the giants. Actually both of them were in the times, when the skill of size using hadn't been established yet, so they had numbers of losses to the smaller guys with some being absolutely devastating. They both seemed to be far from the perfection in the technical aspect by the standards of their times, so their match-up could have turned out to be a brawl, where the tougher man should have pulled out a victory. Willard was considered to be more durable, I'd pick Jess to score a KO.

HomicideHenry wrote: ↑22 May 2014, 18:44 I think it comes down to all-around ability vs conditioning.

Willard, by his own admission, wasn't the most sound boxer. His tactic was to throw jabs, to keep men and bay, and if they came close he threw an uppercut. Outside of that, he clinched and mauled. He did go 26 rounds with an older, slower, inactive Jack Johnson under 110 degree heat in the shade in Cuba. And, he took the worst beating in heavyweight history from Jack Dempsey. He was well conditioned and tough as they came. He was the taller of the two men, and with a longer reach. He was quite possibly the strongest heavyweight champion, outside of Carnera, for he was allegedly capable of lifting and tossing 500 pound bales of cotton.

Carnera, on the other hand, threw alot of jabs, and for a man 6'5" 275 he was rather light on his feet. He had greater ring generalship than Willard. And he had more apparent skills. He was also, in my view, as tough as Willard, if not tougher in regards. When I look at film of him facing Max Baer, and how he took Baer's body punches as if they were nothing--- it gives me pause to wonder, out of the two men who was the more courageous. His kayo of Sharkey, I've always believed to of been legit, because Carnera turned his body weight into that shot and hit Sharkey flush--- and the power behind that shot, shows Carnera did have some major pop to his punches when he was in the right position to do so, because Sharkey flew up into the air like a Popeye cartoon.

The one thing these two men, also had in common, was the fact that they killed someone in the ring. For Willard, it was against a prospect white hope named 'Wild' Bull Young. Willard apparently broke his neck with a tremendous uppercut. For a long time, however, it was thought to of been the result of a punch to Young's heart area--- and a film serial entitled "The Heart Punch" was seen throughout theatres in the country, showing Willard's power. Carnera, on the other hand, fought long standing contender Ernie Schaaf, and the man fell over dead after being hit with a right hand. Unbeknownst to Carnera, Schaaf had recently suffered from meningitis and his death was caused more from this than Carnera's punches--- however, from that time onward, Carnera never displayed the sort of drive or aggression in the ring as he once did, prior to facing Schaaf.

Strangely enough, though, for all their size and strength--- these two men had relatively low knockout percentages. Most of Willard's fights were no-decisions, and because of this he was initially written off as being the best white hope in the world--- only the death of Luther McCarty brought Willard's name back into the spotlight. Carnera, despite outweighing men by as much as 80 pounds, also had a low kayo percentage--- this was more likely due to his excessive muscularity, which robbed him of the much needed fluidity a boxer needs to score kayos. Most of his kayos came against hand picked journeymen and flat out tomato cans, during Carnera's initial American tour.

To break it all down--- if you were to ask me who would win, I would more than likely lean toward Primo Carnera, only for the simple fact that he had more fights, over a longer period of time, against a higher caliber of opposition, than Willard did. Carnera was also more developed as a boxer, and his fitness was insane for a man of his size and bulk. I believe, he would of out worked Willard. I point out two fights as evidence: Carnera's wins over Ray Impelltierre and Jose Santa, both were between 6'8" and 6'9" in height and weighed between 240-250 pounds. He proved to be the best "giant" of his day. Jess Willard--- who lost to McCarty and other behemoths, or could only manage no-decisions, wasnt able to do that.

It was in the mid 70s, with an overcast sky. Johnson made up the heat to excuse his loss and Willard later in life confused his Toledo fight (with Dempsey where it actually was 100 degrees) with Cuba.

Though I do agree with your assessment regarding Carnera.

Carnera fought a lot of good competition. He won some and lost some. As is typical with big heavyweights throughout boxing history, they had their advantages and disadvantages when fighting decent smaller heavyweights.
I do think Willard had the better conditioning of the two and the better chin. Carnera seemed to be a bit better of a boxer of the two. I give Carnera a slight edge but it certainly could go either way.

Perhaps they were both simply, "too tall to fall". 15 round Draw.