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 11-09-2011, 04:10 PM   #16
PowerPuncher
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,610
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Just studied Sam Langford and Jack Johnson on film..my conclusion

Quote:
Originally Posted by lufcrazy View Post
I'd agree that prime for prime Johnson whips Langford (and just about anybody smaller than him)

From 1911-1915 it's a different story though: Johnson was unmotivated and out of shape; Langford was hungry and was destroying top 5 opponents like there was no tomorrow.

I'm hoping the usual boxrec brigade will actually do some research before pratting on about losses suffered by Langford during these 4 years.
Langford's record from 1911-15 isn't half as good as made out. Don't just look at the wins but also the losses and draws and the fact he was overweight during this period.
PowerPuncher is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 11-09-2011, 04:14 PM   #17
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 21,282
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Just studied Sam Langford and Jack Johnson on film..my conclusion

Quote:
Originally Posted by he grant View Post
Jeannette and McVey's are common enough .. Wills as well. In addition, the obvious manner in which he avoided fighting him speaks for itself.
I asked for primary proof,if you have quotes from newspaper interviews ,then produce them. Otherwise your statement is worthless.

Sam McVey , to my knowledge , never said anything derogatory ,or negative about Johnson, they were firm friends, and Mcvey ,not only travelled with Johnson ,he lived with him and his wife a couple of times. Johnson paid for Sam's funeral.

Please show primary sources that Jeannette ,Wills,[whom Johnson sacked as a sparring partner because he could not handle the punishment], and McVey .EVER SAID THAT LANGFORD WOULD DESTROY JOHNSON ,AFTER RENO 1910.
IF THEIR QUOTES CONFIRMING YOUR STATEMENTS ARE ,"COMMON ENOUGH",YOU SHOULD HAVE NO TROUBLE FINDING, AND SUPPLYING THEM SHOULD YOU?

If you do not do so, I can only conclude that you are adopting the Mendoza defence,ie, ignoring requests for proof after making unsubstantiated assertions.
mcvey is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2011, 04:23 PM   #18
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,605
vCash: 330
Default Re: Just studied Sam Langford and Jack Johnson on film..my conclusion

Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerPuncher View Post
Langford's record from 1911-15 isn't half as good as made out. Don't just look at the wins but also the losses and draws and the fact he was overweight during this period.


his record in 1910 is good enough as it is [Flynn (1-1-0), Ketchel, Jim Johnson, Kubiak, Jeannette, Clarke], but by virtue of the monumentous victory Johnson scored that year, it wouldn't be right elevating anyone above him.

From 1911 he had the meaningful resume as follows Jeannette (3-0-2), Lang, O'Brien, McVey (3-1-1), Ross, Dan Flynn (2-0-0), Smith (2-0-0)* Jim Johnson (2-0-1), Clarke (0-1-0), Wills (1-0-2) up until 1915

The loss to smith is quite disputed, the loss to clarke can stand but apparently that could have gone either way also. The loss to McVey is legit. some guys he beat more than thrice but it doens't really mean anything after the third victory imo.

He pretty much spanked everyone out there barring jack himself.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2011, 04:23 PM   #19
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,037
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Just studied Sam Langford and Jack Johnson on film..my conclusion

Nah, I don't think that's it at all. I think Langford is a fighter who looks like he could control the footwork and territory on film and Johnson wasn't used to that - when someone could pull it off like O'Brien did it generally meant an interesting night.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2011, 04:23 PM   #20
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,037
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Just studied Sam Langford and Jack Johnson on film..my conclusion

Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerPuncher View Post
Langford's record from 1911-15 isn't half as good as made out.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2011, 04:25 PM   #21
Turner72
Journeyman
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 53
vCash: 500
Default Re: Just studied Sam Langford and Jack Johnson on film..my conclusion

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcvey View Post
I asked for primary proof,if you have quotes from newspaper interviews ,then produce them. Otherwise your statement is worthless.
Perhaps "Adam said ....."
Turner72 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2011, 04:35 PM   #22
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 21,282
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Just studied Sam Langford and Jack Johnson on film..my conclusion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turner72 View Post
Perhaps "Adam said ....."
Perhaps indeed!

I purposely quoted Adam a few times last week ,expecting to get pulled up on it ,but it obviously went under the radar.

Meanwhile, we wait for those sources.
mcvey is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2011, 04:53 PM   #23
PowerPuncher
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,610
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Just studied Sam Langford and Jack Johnson on film..my conclusion

Quote:
Originally Posted by lufcrazy View Post


his record in 1910 is good enough as it is [Flynn (1-1-0), Ketchel, Jim Johnson, Kubiak, Jeannette, Clarke], but by virtue of the monumentous victory Johnson scored that year, it wouldn't be right elevating anyone above him.

From 1911 he had the meaningful resume as follows Jeannette (3-0-2), Lang, O'Brien, McVey (3-1-1), Ross, Dan Flynn (2-0-0), Smith (2-0-0)* Jim Johnson (2-0-1), Clarke (0-1-0), Wills (1-0-2) up until 1915

The loss to smith is quite disputed, the loss to clarke can stand but apparently that could have gone either way also. The loss to McVey is legit. some guys he beat more than thrice but it doens't really mean anything after the third victory imo.

He pretty much spanked everyone out there barring jack himself.
Over the period he has 6 losses and 11 draws and 1 NC out of 55 fights during this period, that's 33% of fights he did not win so he was hardly dominant. He was the best contender during this period granted but not by as much as people make out. He has plenty of losses to fighters several levels below Johnson as you noted
PowerPuncher is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2011, 04:58 PM   #24
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,605
vCash: 330
Default Re: Just studied Sam Langford and Jack Johnson on film..my conclusion

Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerPuncher View Post
Over the period he has 6 losses and 11 draws and 1 NC out of 55 fights during this period, that's 33% of fights he did not win so he was hardly dominant. He was the best contender during this period granted but not by as much as people make out. He has plenty of losses to fighters several levels below Johnson as you noted
no he has 4, 3 of which are debatable.

you could also note he beat everyone he fought during this timeframe, knocking the majority out.

jeannette, mcvey, smith, wills, all knocked out by sam.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2011, 05:12 PM   #25
PowerPuncher
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,610
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Just studied Sam Langford and Jack Johnson on film..my conclusion

Quote:
Originally Posted by lufcrazy View Post
no he has 4, 3 of which are debatable.

you could also note he beat everyone he fought during this timeframe, knocking the majority out.

jeannette, mcvey, smith, wills, all knocked out by sam.
From 1911-1915 boxrec has him losing 6 fights and drawing 11 with 1 NC

He did beat everyone in that time frame, but he lost to allot of the best, none near the class of a Jack Johnson, the best had already been dominated by Johnson. Johnson was much more dominant in his pre-title run
PowerPuncher is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2011, 05:22 PM   #26
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,605
vCash: 330
Default Re: Just studied Sam Langford and Jack Johnson on film..my conclusion

Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerPuncher View Post
From 1911-1915 boxrec has him losing 6 fights and drawing 11 with 1 NC

He did beat everyone in that time frame, but he lost to allot of the best, none near the class of a Jack Johnson, the best had already been dominated by Johnson. Johnson was much more dominant in his pre-title run
you need to look deeper and put things into context man. from his 1911 victory over jeannette upto but not including his 1915 loss to jeannette, he was quite clearly the most impressive hw in the world as demonstrated by the breakdown I gave you.

who is comparing this run with johnson's pre-title run

we're talking about a possible rematch between the two with me giving the timefram I'd give same the best chance as 1911-1915 (by 1915 it drops to 50/50 for the reasons I gave to kurupt)
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2011, 06:14 PM   #27
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,044
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Just studied Sam Langford and Jack Johnson on film..my conclusion

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuzieQ49 View Post
I can see why Johnson battered Sam back in 1906. Sam was simply made for Jack. The result would always be 1906 in my opinion.
Where your theory breaks down, is in the fact that Johnson goes into nosedive in 1910, while Langford continues to improve.

Ultimately, you ought to be able to hand pick a point in the timeline, where Langford wins.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2011, 06:16 PM   #28
SuzieQ49
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Martha's Vineyard
Posts: 13,430
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Just studied Sam Langford and Jack Johnson on film..my conclusion

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post
Where your theory breaks down, is in the fact that Johnson goes into nosedive in 1910, while Langford continues to improve.

Ultimately, you ought to be able to hand pick a point in the timeline, where Langford wins.
How about this. The 1908-1910 Jack Johnson beats ANY version of Sam Langford.
SuzieQ49 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2011, 06:18 PM   #29
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 21,282
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Just studied Sam Langford and Jack Johnson on film..my conclusion

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post
Where your theory breaks down, is in the fact that Johnson goes into nosedive in 1910, while Langford continues to improve.

Ultimately, you ought to be able to hand pick a point in the timeline, where Langford wins.
There is certainly some substance to your argument, but equally ,we should not automatically assume that Langford was allways in the best of shape himself during this period.
And, possibly some of his uneven results reflect that?
mcvey is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2011, 06:19 PM   #30
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,044
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Just studied Sam Langford and Jack Johnson on film..my conclusion

Quote:
Originally Posted by SuzieQ49 View Post
How about this. The 1908-1910 Jack Johnson beats ANY version of Sam Langford.
Probably.
janitor 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 08:16 PM.


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