Sam Langford vs Marvin Hagler

Since we have the guy who wrote the book on Langford (literally) I always wanted to ask; do you think Langford few into his power from his days at lightweight or do you think that the power was always there and fighting the big guys just meant he could land easier and more flush?

 

Langford,by all accounts,was at his best around the Light Heavy poundage,so I'd say Hagler takes a decision at the 160 limit.

 

"Since we have the guy who wrote the book on Langford (literally) I always wanted to ask; do you think Langford few into his power from his days at lightweight or do you think that the power was always there and fighting the big guys just meant he could land easier and more flush?"

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

As much as I love Hagler, it has to be Langford here.

 

Fleischer's father in law was at the Johnson-Langford bout. Fleischer wrote of his conversations with his father in law that the fight was one sided and that Langford was taken to the hospital afterward. The only reason why Sam lasted the distance is that Johnson eased off of him after dropping him early. This really should be no surprise since JJ outweighed Sam by 40 or so pounds.

Fleischer also wrote that he would razz Johnson about that fight kidding around that Langford really kicked his butt. It got to a point where JJ turned to Fleischer one day with tears in his eyes stating..."Nat call me the worst fighter you ever saw and I was yellow but please dont say that Langford beat me or even gave me a tough fight...its simply not true".

 

Would anyone beat Langford at 168lbs

 

"The only reason why Sam lasted the distance is that Johnson eased off of him after dropping him early."

I'm not sure about a visit to the hospital by Langford but don't believe the above statement to be true. By all accounts there was no easing off by Johnson, who did everything he could to put Sam away. Johnson lost a wager with Sam for failing to knock him out. He'd bet Sam that he wouldn't go the distance. Another excerpt:

"

This content is protected

This content is protected

$500, and he was wildly cheered by the crowd for the courage he exhibited. Wrote The Globe,
There is one thing sure: that when Langford left the
ring the spectators did not call him the names that they
did when Sandy (Ferguson) fought Johnson at the same
club.
There was no disagreement over whether Johnson had
won the fight. Various reports made it clear the affair had
been one sided, but there was much admiration expressed for
the smaller man’s fighting spirit."

 

Thank you sir. You not only answered my question but made me wonder about the oft repeated maxim that punchers are born not made. Certainly seems like a little instruction turned Langford from a good hitter into one of the greatest of all time.

 

This is the quote from Fleischers book 50 years at ringside:

Dad Phillips my father in law who knowledge I match with anyone was at that fight and was in the room when I razzed Johnson. He agreed with Johnsons version of the fight.."Jj decisively defeated Langford. He was the complete master of the situation. Jack so far outclassed Langford that for a time, until he eased up on his onslaughts, the fight was one sided. Langford was dropped twice for counts of nine and he would have been out the first time if the ref had not slowed up the count. At the end of the fight Sam had to be taken to the hospital. As for Sam dropping Jack thats absurd why he could not land on jack."

A few days later Nat cornered Joe Woodman who handled Sam for that fight and was spreading the rumor that Sam had actually knocked down and gave Johnson a tough fight. Nat demand the low down of what happened that day. All woodman would say is .."Its all true Nat"

Several weeks later Woodman came to Fleischers office with a new hwt prospect asking is Nat would run a story and picture of the lad. Nat said sure but on one condition...."you tell me what actually happened during the langford johnson bout since Dad states your all wrong about it"

Joe chuckled..."You got me Nat. Langford never dropped Johnson but I was anxious to make another bout with Jack so I invented the story to goat Johnson into the bout."

 

Yes, I'm familiar with that quote from Fleischer's book and include this information in the Langford book. By all accounts he gave Langford a terrific beating that day. The only comment that I was taking exception to was the one about Johnson easing up on him to let him stay the limit. The newspaper accounts and the story about the wager between the two that I've read don't support that. And, I never heard anything about Johnson saying anything like that.

I know that many believe Johnson would have defeated Sam again had they fought a second time, and even I have to believe Sam would have had a difficult time beating him after he'd matured physically and grown into a legitimate light-heavyweight but as far as I'm concerned it's a black mark against Johnson that he chose to avoid the true # 1 contender for a number of years during his title reign.

 

"There is no such thing as a natural puncher. There is a natural aptitude for punching and that is different. Nobody is born the best. You have to practice and train to become the best.” Cus D'Amato

 

Had Langford fought Ketchel for the title, the key issue would have been Sam's ability perform at the weight.

You might just have got a Lavigne Walcott scenario.

If Langford had been close to his beat at this time/weight he would have taken Ketchel's title, and the same would go for Hagler.

 

Agree Langford was better at the higher weights, but his body of work is hardly "non-existent" at MW and below.
Beating Joe Gans at Lightweight and (according to most who saw the fight) Walcott at Welter are not negligible achievements. He won the colored middleweight championship (which was not some two-bit title), and showed himself the equal of Ketchel. Also worth remembering that several of Langford's fights against heavyweights were while he was campaigning at Middle - he was still basically a Middleweight when he fought Johnson.

Based on quality of opposition at Middleweight and below, I don't think he's lagging behind Hagler at all. He's definitely a harder puncher and (from the admittedly very scanty footage) one of the slickest defensive fighters of all time. Though Marvin is made of granite and would push him every step of the way.

Would not want to bet on the outcome of this, but if anyone invents a time machine be sure to let me know.

 

cant see anyone beating hagler at the middleweight limit.how many of langfords fights are on you tube by the way ??

 

Hagler picks Langford apart with his jabs, straighter punches and tighter defense.

He signed to fight him only to have the offer rescinded once he was persecuted for having a relationship with a white girl