FITZ on Johnson vs Langford

A more interesting questions in some ways, is how Sam Langford compares to Fitzsimmons himself.

They might just be the two best pound for pound finishers of all time.

 

I actually think it's the smaller craftier guys Fitz struggled with. The bigger guys, he was just too quick for.

What a fight that would be though. Langford late KO.

 

I tend to agree with Bob. Langford was a heck of a fighter and puncher, but power did not bother Johnson, and at 5'7" max and only 170-180 max, Langford was no bigger than guys like Burns and Ketchel, with whom Johnson played with like a cat does a mouse. Too much cleverness, defense, speed, power, strength, height, reach, and experience combined for Langford to solve.

And as for all that nonsense about Johnson not being able to take the body punishment, no one ever proved that. That was something whites often claimed about black fighters - that they had hard heads but couldn't take it to the body. Like I said, no one ever demonstrated that in regards to Johnson, despite the efforts of many to do so.

 

It wets your appetite.:good

 

Thanks, Surf-Bat!

 

Fitzsimmons vs Langford? Sick!

Sums it up nicely I think

 

By chance did you see Langford hammer a prime Jeannette all over the ring on film? Even the most steadfast fans of little Arthur would admit that Jeannette was more durable. And if you ask me Jeannette had far more heart.


Langford is often referred to as small. A better description would be compact. I have Langford's workout clips. He's built like a modern NFL running back. Sam at 175-185 was also very strong and had active hands. Not an easy man to man handle in a clinch.


For those who like to use common opponents for a basis of a fantasy outcome, from 1908-1915 Johnson and Langford fought many of the same opponents. In most cases Langfrod's results were more impressive.

 

It's like doing the Ali and Foreman comparison. Ali still owns Foreman even though George was more of a puncher and KO'd guys with whom Ali went the distance. Or Diego Corrales and Mayweather. Or Tyson and Holyfeild. One is more of a puncher and the other is more of a boxer. No one denies that Langford was more of an ass beater and finisher than Johnson. But head to head Johnson had the stuff that would have frustrated the living hell out of Langford. Fitzsimmons knew it too.

 

fair points but as for that last point, common opponents are of limited utility in the end. langford was able to impose his will and fight a plan against jeanette in a way that i doubt he ever could have against johnson

 

Keep in mind also, if you want to do the comparison thing, that Langford didn't always beat some of the men that Johnson beat. Sure he beat them in rematches, but he had occasional struggles and mixed results against guys whom Johnson beat. Langford once retired against Young Peter Jackson and Joe Jeannette, lost a newspaper decision to Flynn, couldn't deck Ketchel (a man Johnson carried and could have KO'd at any time), got a draw with McVey and lost to McVey (whom Johnson easily beat every time), in addition to later losses to Gunboat Smith, Jeannette, and McVey. Yes Langford usually beat these guys in rematches and sometimes stopped them, and was a hell of a fighter, no doubt, but I'm just saying that you can't necessarily say he was some unbeatable force even in his best years. He was often in close bouts with guys whom Johnson beat. And several times he suffered flash knockdowns against some of his foes, so he could be decked too. Johnson might not have been the best finisher, but he had enough power to drop guys. And no one said any of those guys had more skill than Johnson.

But ultimately the above is not why I pick Johnson over Langford. I just don't see Sam as matching up well with Johnson, who was much heavier, much taller, had greater reach, had as much physical strength, was considered faster, had slicker footwork, and was considered the era's hardest man to hit and a defensive genius. Defense is often the biggest deciding factor in big fights between a great boxer and a great puncher. Solid small men like Burns and Ketchel, who were most similar in size to Langford, could do nothing with him. Even big strong punchers like McVey, Kaufman, and Jeffries could not overpower him and got owned. I just don't see Langford at 5'7" being able to penetrate that Johnson defense often enough to win. Conversely, I see Johnson landing on Langford often enough to secure the verdict.

 

Apollack,

Aggressive pressure fighters seldom lose to boxer types that do not throw a lot of punches, especially when the pressure fighter hits harder and is more durable. This is the rule of thumb in boxing. You are picking against the grain.


Langford in his prime was extremely hard to stop. Didn't he go something like 100 matches at one point in his career before being stopped? I think so. And some of those matches were vs. prime versions of Jeannette, McVey, and Wills. I think Langford's durability, and heart in his prime from 1908-1915 is as battle tested as it get, and unlike Johnson, Langford actually beat prime versions of these men, two of which were bigger and hit harder then Johnson ( McVey and Wills ), while the other ( Jeannette ) might have been a tad lighter, but was more active and had an even great reach in comparison to Johnson. Who, if anyone tied up and bulled Langford from 1908-1915 in clinches? I cannot think of one man.


If Johnson could not tame Marvin Hart ( another high effort pressure fighter type ) in a high stakes fight where the winner was billed to face Jeffries, how would he do the same to Langford, who was better than Hart in just about every phase of the game? Sure Langford lost a controversial decision to a then red hot Gunboat Smith. The same Smith had Johnson down and dazed in a 4 round exhibition match where Johnson manager had to halt the action because Johnson was seeing stars.


Good luck on your Johnson book. I'm sure you will give his career in and out of the ring a good examination. When you research Johnson's matches vs Mcvey, Jeannette and Langford, the truth needs to be told. McVey was a teenager when Johnson beat him, and only 20 in the third match. Jeannette a raw novice with a losing record in some of the fights and weighed no more than 170 pounds. Langford was just 156 pounds, and according to Clay's reasearch was only 20. I would say Langford, who scored KO's vs. the same guys in their primes and also defeated Wills had the more meaningfull victories by a wide margin.