Max Schmeling vs Sam Langford

SCHMELING was stopped 4 times ,once as a lhvy,once when he was 19 by Larry Gains,and twice by two of the biggest hitters of all time, Baer and Louis. Baer hit him with everything including the kitchen sink and a couple of backhanders.
He was past it when Louis massacred him.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yilXvhph3Y[/ame]


Schmeling's chin was as good as Langford's ,who was on the floor at least 30 times.

 

i definitely acknowledge your argument here, but you do hear talk of "damage scoring punches", which jabs do not seem to be in the opinion of contemporary writers.

At the verry least there seems to have been controvesy about how/whether jabs should be scored.

 

Nobody here has McVea higher than Schmeling, to my knowledge.

Personaly, I think he would have been tailor made for Schmeling.

He would still occupy a prety high place on the list of people Schmeling beat though.

 

Im tempted to say why even ask that question? Read what Joe Louis, Ray Arcel, Manny Seamon, Cus Damato, Eddie Futch, Hank Kaplan freekin everybody et all had to say about Blackburns acumen and stature in the fight game.

Corner men: the great boxing trainers

books.google.com
Ronald K. Fried - 1991 - 414 pages - No preview
Here is a close-up look at the trainers who shaped boxing champions like Joe Louis, Rocky Graziano, Jake LaMotta, and other greats
http://books.google.com/books?id=y-...a=X&ei=2lD8T--9MaXf0QHi7_3iBg&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA

 

Schmeling was not past his prime in the Louis rematch

 

Three wins over unrated fighters does not persuade me that Max was not a bit past his peak.

 

Shut up

 

:huh You do talk some utter bollocks sometimes. That makes no sense whatsoever when McVea fought Langford the first 2 times he drew and bet him. Not too mention that Langford had well over 2 months preparation for the second fight (1 and a 3rd) far more than him and many others where used to. On the other hand McVea had just 15 days to prepare for the second fight.

Will be interesting to see if you admit to being wrong or try and get out of it by saying something ridiculous like Langford was too inactive.

 

I will show you why it is not a complete waste of time to research a fighters career.

The first fight was ruled a draw, but the decision was heavily criticised. McVea himself admited that Langford deserved the decision saying:

"I was defeated and am the first to recognise this. Langford is too powerful and too hard. My blows came up against a wall."

The second fight took place in Australia, and Langford landed exactly a month before the fight took place. McVea for contrast had been based in Australia for three months.

In fairness to Mcvea he was probably fighting under circumstances as unfavourable as Langford, but you miss my point. All the black dynamite fighters had to fight much more regularly than their white counterparts and against tougher opposition. This inevitably meant that they lost occasionaly. This is as much in mitigation of McVea as it is of Langford.

The result of the second fight was also controvertial, but the decision was probably justified at least under the rules that were normal in Australia at the time. If the fight had been in America, Langford would probably have got the nod.

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Of course not. Young by certain standards, and in his prime as well ...

 

My post was a rebuttal to your inference that Schmeling's chin was inferior to Langford's.
You mentioned Wills , McVey,Hague,Smith,[ twice:huh]and, Klondike.
Let 's look at those fights.

Wills fought Langford 17 times

Wills won 13
There were2 draws.

LANGFORD WAS FLOORED OVER 10 TIMES.

LANGFORD WAS STOPPED TWICE.BOTH TIMES IN 1918,WHEN LANGFORD WAS 33.

THOUGH YOU SAY LANGFORD WAS POSSIBLY UP TO 2 YEARS YOUNGER, THAT WOULD MAKE HIM 31 ,2 YEARS YOUNGER THAN SCHMELING , WHEN LOUIS KOD HIM.

McVey.fought Langford 10 times.

McVey won 2

There were 4 draws.

Two of the wins for Langford were scored wins for Mcvey,or draws by some papers.

McVey had Langford down in his win in Australia.

Hague fought Langford only once he had him down.

Smith fought Langford twice he concentrated on jabbing Langford in their first fightand received a controversial decision


Langford bombed Smith out in the rematch , which made the first fight look even more peculiar.

Kondike fought Langford only once ,and was stopped in 2 rds.

Thats 31 fights. Langford was stopped in 2 of them ,and floored at leat 12 times in them.


You say Wills and McVey hit as hard,or harder than Schmeling, that is debatable, what is not debatable is that they did not hit as hard as the two kos on Schmeling' record when hewas an established class boxer, namely Baer ,and Louis.

Both men would have been the biggest hitters that Langford ever faced.

If Langford had faced either of them,it is possible he might have been stopped too is it not?


You base Schmeling's chin on him being stopped when he was a young light heavyweight ,and stopped when 19 by Larry Gains , yet excuse a 23 years old ,52 fight Langford for being stopped by welterweight Young Peter Jackson ?:huh


I think it is patently obvious that it is you who is only showing , "one side of the coin"

 

I think it's safe to assume that if Max Schmeling fought as often as Langford, against the same level of opposition and under the same circumstances that Sam had to endure that he would have many more knockdowns, draws, stoppage losses, etc. on his resume.

Remember that Archie Moore has quite a few knockdowns on his record as well. LOTS of them.