Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-09-2011, 03:42 PM   #61
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,035
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which of the lineal heavyweight champions would Sam Langford have beaten?

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post


I don't think the fact that sombody is beating elite fighters necesarily means that they are close to their peak.
Maybe you are right; but it certainly means they are elite. Now, if Langford is beating and drawing with better fighters than Fulton and Tate, but struggling with them, we have to ask why.


Quote:
There were not many world class fighters over 6'4'' during Langfords prime. Langford did KO Tate who was at least world class, plus a few journeyman types. Harry Wills was himself a good 6' 3'' as were Sandy Ferguson and George Godfrey.
Right, but his record versus men of 6'6 is horrible, inspite of the fact that they weren't anything like the best fighters he fought, even in and around that time.

Reports for Fulton describe him countering the more ponderous right with some success but struggling to do any work with that left hand. The footage we have of Tate in an actual fight shows him basically only throwing the jab.

Slipping this punch, closing a foot of reach advantage, then punching or trapping against a reasonably mobile opponent - which both Wlad and Lewis are - across another foot, this time vertical, is a monumental technical task. The evidence of this is Sam's KO of Bill Tate, who, to my eye, was horrible, the evidence against are his struggles with Tate and Fulton, which seemed to be based principally on height and reach.

Now we have him up against the two best tall jabbers in the history of the sport.

This being the case, I think tentatively drawing certain conclusions is reasonable.
McGrain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 01-09-2011, 03:56 PM   #62
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,044
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which of the lineal heavyweight champions would Sam Langford have beaten?

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain View Post
Maybe you are right; but it certainly means they are elite. Now, if Langford is beating and drawing with better fighters than Fulton and Tate, but struggling with them, we have to ask why.
Perhaps it is just that the things that erode first e.g reflexes and footwork, are the atributes most important to overcoming size difference.

Quote:
Right, but his record versus men of 6'6 is horrible, inspite of the fact that they weren't anything like the best fighters he fought, even in and around that time.
Perhaps Fulton would have beaten a faded Sam McVea or Jeff Clark. Wills had some mixed results against tate anyway.

Quote:
Reports for Fulton describe him countering the more ponderous right with some success but struggling to do any work with that left hand. The footage we have of Tate in an actual fight shows him basically only throwing the jab.

Slipping this punch, closing a foot of reach advantage, then punching or trapping against a reasonably mobile opponent - which both Wlad and Lewis are - across another foot, this time vertical, is a monumental technical task. The evidence of this is Sam's KO of Bill Tate, who, to my eye, was horrible, the evidence against are his struggles with Tate and Fulton, which seemed to be based principally on height and reach.

This being the case, I think tentatively drawing certain conclusions is reasonable.
Again you are making inferences based on fights of which there are no film.

What if you had footage of the Fulton fight and it was obvious that Sam had slowed down considerably from the Jeanette fight?
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2011, 04:04 PM   #63
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,035
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which of the lineal heavyweight champions would Sam Langford have beaten?

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post

Perhaps it is just that the things that erode first e.g reflexes and footwork, are the atributes most important to overcoming size difference.
Fighters on the slide become vulnerable first and foremost to the styles/whatever that they are most vulnerable to anyway. Footwork and reflexes abandoning a fighter leave him in just as much trouble against a swarmer, boxer or speedster. These are absolutely crucial fundamentals.


Quote:
Perhaps Fulton would have beaten a faded Sam McVea or Jeff Clark. Wills had some mixed results against tate anyway.
Yes, but these guys weren't better than the fighters that Sam was beating and drawing with. That's the point and it's all but undeniable.


Quote:
Again you are making inferences based on fights of which there are no film.
What did you expect when you started this thread?

Quote:
What if you had footage of the Fulton fight and it was obvious that Sam had slowed down considerably from the Jeanette fight?
But I know that he did, without the film.

Drawing conclusions based upon fights that fighters had past their prime is perfectly reasonable in deducing how that fighter would do against various styles/whatever - and you've asked specifically for this kind of speculation.


I'll summarise:

Evidence for Langford versus massive fighters in his prime - non existant

Evidence for Langford versus massive fighters past his prime - indicates he struggles.

Additionaly, the technical and tactical difficulties involved in beating fighters who are a foot taller and have a reach advantage of a foot plus are absolutely colossal. I would suggest that evidence in support of a fighter's abilities in this area is neccessary before they are assumed. I think that what limited evidence we have indicates that they would be beyond him when also happening to box in the top twenty head to head all time.
McGrain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2011, 04:38 PM   #64
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,044
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which of the lineal heavyweight champions would Sam Langford have beaten?

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain View Post
Fighters on the slide become vulnerable first and foremost to the styles/whatever that they are most vulnerable to anyway. Footwork and reflexes abandoning a fighter leave him in just as much trouble against a swarmer, boxer or speedster. These are absolutely crucial fundamentals.
Langford relied heavily on his mobility against larger fighters and if his footwork was eroded then we might expect his performence against larger fighters to be inhibited more than his performence against smaller fighters.

Quote:
Yes, but these guys weren't better than the fighters that Sam was beating and drawing with. That's the point and it's all but undeniable.
So who was the best fighter Langford unambiguously beat around this time, and why do you think they were so much better than Fulton?
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2011, 04:44 PM   #65
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,035
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which of the lineal heavyweight champions would Sam Langford have beaten?

[quote=janitor;8639006]
Quote:


Langford relied heavily on his mobility against larger fighters and if his footwork was eroded then we might expect his performence against larger fighters to be inhibited more than his performence against smaller fighters.
Quite, but against swarmers he's going to find it harder to pick his spots (Reactions) against mobile boxers he's going to find it harder and harder to cut of the ring (footwork) against pure punchers he's going to find it harder and harder to ditch big punches (footwork and reactions) and so on and so forth.


Quote:
So who was the best fighter Langford unambiguously beat around this time, and why do you think they were so much better than Fulton?
I think that Wills, with whom he drew twice right around this time, is much better.
McGrain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2011, 04:55 PM   #66
Unforgiven
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 12,568
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which of the lineal heavyweight champions would Sam Langford have beaten?

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post
Tate held Harry Wills to a draw when the latter was the #1 ranked contender and some ringsiders seem to think that he deserved the decision.

I think that we at least have to acknowledge Tate as a contender.
OK, I don't consider "journeyman" and "contender" to be mutually exclusive terms.

One expert described HARRY WILLS as "a good journeyman".
Unforgiven is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2011, 04:56 PM   #67
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,035
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which of the lineal heavyweight champions would Sam Langford have beaten?

Tell me his name, i'll **** him up.
McGrain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2011, 04:58 PM   #68
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,044
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which of the lineal heavyweight champions would Sam Langford have beaten?

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain View Post
Quite, but against swarmers he's going to find it harder to pick his spots (Reactions) against mobile boxers he's going to find it harder and harder to cut of the ring (footwork) against pure punchers he's going to find it harder and harder to ditch big punches (footwork and reactions) and so on and so forth.
Granted there would be issues, but taking on bigger fighters is a young fighters game at the best of times because it verry specificaly depends on certain equalizers.

Quote:
I think that Wills, with whom he drew twice right around this time, is much better.
So do I, but without seeing the fight reports, he might have got those draws just for finishing the fight on his feet. Lets not forgett that Wills also stopped him twice around this time including his first career ten count. These results could be seen as being comparable to Fultons performence.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
This is how it was seen at the time.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2011, 05:00 PM   #69
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,044
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which of the lineal heavyweight champions would Sam Langford have beaten?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unforgiven View Post
OK, I don't consider "journeyman" and "contender" to be mutually exclusive terms.

One expert described HARRY WILLS as "a good journeyman".
I guess he wasn't a verry good expert then!
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2011, 05:07 PM   #70
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,035
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which of the lineal heavyweight champions would Sam Langford have beaten?

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post


Granted there would be issues, but taking on bigger fighters is a young fighters game at the best of times because it verry specificaly depends on certain equalizers.



So do I, but without seeing the fight reports, he might have got those draws just for finishing the fight on his feet. Lets not forgett that Wills also stopped him twice around this time including his first career ten count. These results could be seen as being comparable to Fultons performence.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
This is how it was seen at the time.


Langford was competitve in the world class, but seems to have been vulnerable to the physical advantages of fighters so vastly inferior to Lewis and Wlad that for me, this class gap becomes more important than Langford's condition, which was enough to keep him competitive with Harry Wills and others.

Arguing that he was as past-prime as Holmes Ali is not supported by the evidence at hand, and nor is Langford's supposed superiority versus fighters a foot taller than him.
McGrain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2011, 05:53 PM   #71
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,044
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which of the lineal heavyweight champions would Sam Langford have beaten?

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain View Post
Langford was competitve in the world class, but seems to have been vulnerable to the physical advantages of fighters so vastly inferior to Lewis and Wlad that for me, this class gap becomes more important than Langford's condition, which was enough to keep him competitive with Harry Wills and others.
Part of the problem with this argument is that there isn't even that much size difference between Harry Wills and fred Fulton. We are talking about an inch and a half in height and perhaps two inches in reach.

Dosn't the fact that a younger Langford had sucess against Wills suggest that he would have had the same sucess against Fulton?
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2011, 05:59 PM   #72
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,035
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which of the lineal heavyweight champions would Sam Langford have beaten?

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post
Part of the problem with this argument is that there isn't even that much size difference between Harry Wills and fred Fulton. We are talking about an inch and a half in height and perhaps two inches in reach.
Boxrec and wiki list Fulton as 6'6 1/2, and Wills as 6'2. What makes you assured that the difference was 1 and a half rather than 4 and a half inches?


Quote:
Dosn't the fact that a younger Langford had sucess against Wills suggest that he would have had the same sucess against Fulton?
Sure. But this is the problem with your argument. It is entirely undermining. Even if I conceed, right now, entirely, that you are correct, and Langford's results versus Tate and Fulton are irrelevant in decoding his chances against Lewis, where is your evidence to the contrary? Where is the evidence that he did very well against men of this height? There is none.
McGrain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2011, 06:07 PM   #73
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,044
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which of the lineal heavyweight champions would Sam Langford have beaten?

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain View Post
Boxrec and wiki list Fulton as 6'6 1/2, and Wills as 6'2. What makes you assured that the difference was 1 and a half rather than 4 and a half inches?
While Fulton is often cited as 6' 6' 1/2, he was probably 6' 4 1/2 in reality. I tend to go with the lower figure if there are two. Wills was probably just under 6' 3''.

Of course if I am wrong about Fulton then that goes out of the window.

Wills had a reach of 81'' (the same as Wlad incidentaly) and I think Fulton was a bit more than that, say 83'' or 84''. Still only about an inch or so difference in striking distance.

Quote:
Sure. But this is the problem with your argument. It is entirely undermining. Even if I conceed, right now, entirely, that you are correct, and Langford's results versus Tate and Fulton are irrelevant in decoding his chances against Lewis, where is your evidence to the contrary? Where is the evidence that he did very well against men of this height? There is none.
His series with Wills was prety even a few fights in, with Langford having the only knockouts. He was clearly much closer to his prime then than he was against Fulton or Tate.

Was he really much more sucesfull against Wills late in their series than he was against Fulton or Tate?
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2011, 06:11 PM   #74
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,035
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which of the lineal heavyweight champions would Sam Langford have beaten?

[quote=janitor;8639613]
Quote:


While Fulton is often cited as 6' 6' 1/2, he was probably 6' 4 1/2 in reality. I tend to go with the lower figure if there are two. Wills was probably just under 6' 3''.
It's possible, but this is the HIGHEST measurement available anywhere for Wills taken in tandem with the LOWEST measurement available anywhere for Fulton...that seems unreasonable to me, but I'll leave it, because Fulton is still the taller, and still boxes in the most directly comparable style to Wlad in his fight with Langford.


Quote:
Of course if I am wrong about Fulton then that goes out of the window.

Wills had a reach of 81'' (the same as Wlad incidentaly) and I think Fulton was a bit more than that, say 83'' or 84''. Still only about an inch or so difference in striking distance.
Yes, Fulton was taller and had a longer reach.


Quote:
His series with Wills was prety even a few fights in, with Langford having the only knockouts. He was clearly much closer to his prime then than he was against Fulton or Tate.

Was he really much more sucesfull against Wills late in their series than he was against Fulton or Tate?

Well he only fought Fulton once and was beaten, and maimed for life.

He was able to draw with Wills around this time.

Yes, he did better at this time with Wills than Fulton.
McGrain is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-2011, 06:20 PM   #75
bodhi
So I can die easy ...
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 9,491
vCash: 1337
Default Re: Which of the lineal heavyweight champions would Sam Langford have beaten?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalasinn View Post
I bet it's Tyson you favour Langford to beat, you don't need to hide that.

Height & reach be damned, Langford has an intelligent puncher's chance against the fragile Wlad.

Wlad is extremely unproven, the only Tier 2 fighter he's beaten is Byrd, & i insist Chagaev doesn't count since he was suffering badly from Hepatitis.
Wlad isnīt as fragile as you make him out to be. Personally, I donīt think the different between pre-Hep Chagaev and post-Hep Chagaev was big enough to make this win worth less. IMO Wladīs wins over Byrd, Chagaev and Ibragimov are on one level.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGreatA View Post
Chagaev has had more than a few injuries. I believe he had surgery on his eye as well early on in his career. Being as injury-prone as he was made certain that his career was never going to last very long at top level. The Valuev win was basically his high moment, and it has been all downhill since then.
I think his win over Ruiz was better. Better fight too.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Unforgiven View Post
Chagaev was never great anyway, so it's immaterial about his condition for the Wlad fight. Having said that, he might still beat Haye !

I think Wlad's got wins over several fighters of Chagaev's caliber.
Two, perhaps. Yes, Chagaev wasnīt great but one of the better fighters over the last 10 years and probably a contender in any era.
bodhi is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013