Some Perspective About GunBoat's Win Over Langford.

Pretty funny referring to me as a bleeding heart. That being said you’re simply a guy w zero concept of the human condition and clearly never picked up a sociology book. I could not have laid it out simpler for you but you seem to lack empathy so expecting you to see understand this concept is improbable. That aside, I’m waiting to hear your detailed thoughts on how Ray Robinson would have done forced to fight in Sam Langford’s shoes. How would he have done after thirty fighting as often against the caliber of top much naturally bigger men. Eight or so match ups w Jeannette , McVey, a Fifteen rounder w Jack Johnson, a dozen fights w Harry Wills, sandwiching in the Fultons, the Smiths, the Norfolk’s, the Godfrey’s.

 

Seems like James Toney took a page out of his career arc. I believe you. Probably had some dedication issues as compared to his contemporaries.

 

sounds like a 1912/14 version of James Toney.

 

I think that it would be grossly insulting to compare him to James Toney in this context.

Langford was a fighter who was never give an meaningful chance at a title.

Toney was a guy who was given multiple chances, and often blew them.

That is a critical difference when comparing their work ethics.

 

He looks better than Johnson too, Ko'ing Flynn cold, and having his way vs Billy Lang below

This content is protected

 

Johnson should be shamed for pulling out of a contract. You got that one right.

As for Jeffries, he referred to Burns as a blown up middleweight. He did say Burns provided he can get in a couple of good punches to the body would win, which he didn't! Had Burns laded enough, Jeffries could have been proven correct.

Now here's your chance to get another one right.

Was Johnson very good when Jeffries said this? He quit vs. Klondike, lost to Griffin, and pretty much took the 2nd half of the fight vs. Hart off, being defensive and losing on points. Quitting and running back then could equal yellow.

After the fight with Hart, he struggled vs. journeyman McCormick, ( who has a losing 4-6-2 record on box rec in 1906 ) to a draw in 1906. Johnson also drew with Dunning ( a very unknown type of fighter ) in 1906.

 

I'm referring to strictly the shape of the fighter as they enter the ring. Both men had ample gifts and lost to lesser opponents that they would not have, had they been in shape. I wasn't factoring Circumstances beyond their control that may have led to them not showing up in pristine form.

 

There is no doubt his ability it really pops on film. You can see the talent and that his fists were explosive. P4p I believe he was better than Johnson but I'm not sure he would overcome the size difference. Jack may have been good enough to hang on for the win. It is a shame they didn't meet again.

 

Exactly what I was thinking. When Toney said he was old school, he wasn't kidding.

 

We can call this the rest of the story

 

Langford began showing up out of shape long before he would have had any expectation of not getting a shot. That may have been his excuse but at the end of the day he always periodic problems with his dedication. Hed show up 20 pounds overweight when he was still trying to get a shot at the MW title, he cant blame that on Johnson. To compare his situation to the already hyperbolic stories about Burley is silly because Langford was a big drawing card, he was in demand, he got big fights, and he made good money particularly for a black non champion. If he squandered that by living the high life thats on him, not Johnson. The problem was that Langford was able to bail himself out so many times with guile and power he got to where he thought if he slacked off he could still win. Sometimes he did and sometimes he didnt. But to lay all this horse**** at his feet that fits Grants bleeding heart narrative simply isnt a true representation of Langfords character or mindset.

 

Klompton,

Are you saying that if Langford fought what was billed as an elimination match to meet Johnson ( pick any fighter ), he would not be in shape?

Or

If he offered a title match vs. Johnson, he would not be in shape?

No one is saying that Langford was not always in the best of shape, but 1907 to 1914, Langford fought 86 times, losing just four times and never getting stopped...while at times being out of shape. I'm pretty sure one of those losses was a bad call. Maybe two!

That's remarkable consistency when the fighters he fought from 1907-1914 consisted of Jeannette, Mcvey, Smith, Hauge, Clark, O'Brien, and Wills,

It is a given fact that Langford defeated the best versions of Jeannette and Mcvey, which is something Johnson did not do. Langford wins over the same guys Johnson gave title matches to Flynn, Ross, and Battling Jim Johnson was better than Johnson's results vs. the same men.

If anyone deserved a heavyweight title shots that never received one, it was Langford. So bleeding harts aside, HE Grant is correct. Unless you happen to think being out of shape at times is a reason he never received a title shot.