Some Perspective About GunBoat's Win Over Langford.

Why not? Harry Wills and Sam McVey were bigger than Johnson. Langford KO'd them both! Sam also KO'd a greenish George Godfrey who was about 230 pound in shape and Battling Jim Johnson who was about 220.

For a bench mark of weight, the Langford vs Jeanette on film in Paris, lets Langford at 185 3/4 pounds. So we have an idea how he looked and moved at this weight and it was a very impressive performance!

Sam had long arms and the right type of style to overcome being short and was very strong himself.

Langford had good performances as high as 190 pounds. Most of Johnson's best wins come under 190 pounds, and likely was too heavy past 215. So at best, Johnson would have about 20 pounds on a prime heavyweight version of Sam Langford.

 

Where did I ever say Langford didnt deserve a title shot? You are comparing apples and oranges. And yes, during the period you mention Langford absolutely showed up out of shape on occasion, sometimes grossly out of shape. I also said that he often got away with it. Sometimes he didnt. Sometimes he won but his performance was criticized as a result of his condition. How does any of that deviate from my initial overlying point that Sams greatest achilles heel was his sometimes lack of dedication to his craft and that that was merely a character flaw in him and not the result of depression and resignation to his lot in life? It doesnt. My point is consistent within this discussion and with the facts of Langfords life. You can find plenty of examples of Langford being fat as a pig and still winning. Just because he won doesnt mean he was magically more motivated despite being 20 pounds overweight. James Toney could win and still be so fat that the back of his nevk looked like a pack of hot dogs. That victory didnt mean that he was right or should be forgiven for looking like he trained on beer and moonpies. But that was the mentality with these guys. Langford could show up fat and out shape, huff and puff through 8 tounds, finally catch a guy and knock him senseless and then think think he could do it again at a later date. He didnt always do this but he did regularly and regularly enough for long enough and starting early enough and was written about enough and quoted enough that you can say confidently that the guy hadnt just lost his way because he was depressed about being black, on the road, not getting a title shot, not being treated like royalty or whatever other politically correct scenario Grant wants to come up with that steers the discusdion away from the fact that Langford liked to eat, drink, and **** as much or more than he cared about boxing. I cant say I disagree with him but Im not being paid thousands of dollars by fans expecting me to perform at my best for their hard earned money. So yes, I see it as the one flaw he had and one which can account for several of losses and poor performances on his record and the vast majority of negative press he received (and he didnt really receive much negative press beyond discussions of his lack of conditioning).

 

Everything you said is true but Johnson was better than those guys, it's not just the weight it's the quality of opponent. Could Langford KO Johnson absolutely. Would he? I don't know and that's the travesty of that fight never being made. It's clear on film Langford would be Johnson's best opponent once he matured. We all know Johnson didn't go out of his way as champion to fight the top black contenders, whether it was strictly a monetary reason for that decision or one based on ego or fear of losing I Don't know. But the public was robbed of the best possible match that could of been made.
Peak for peak it's a 50/50 match for me. Maybe 55/45 Johnson. Jack had a good chin but not a great one and Sam had a great punch not a good one. Could he deliver it who knows

 

You contradict yourself .. if Clay's excellent book clearly stated he knew he would never get his title shot and lost his desire that is precisely my point .. as far as his weight, there I disagree .. he could have stayed and dominated at middleweight for a long time but was avoided .. as far as his weight, he may have accomplished his best at 175 but if he was afforded the luxury of staying at 160 , a natural weight, who knows what he may have accomplished. As far as Klompton goes, he is very limited and so easy to manipulate it gets boring.

 

If I may cut in , and just say I've learnt more info from this thread regarding the times discussed , its been interesting. So good one McVey!

 

Right. Langford lost desire. Similar to Tim Witherspoon when he was iced out of the picture for a while.

If Sam was champion fighting for larger purses I think he shows up in better shape to defend his titles.

 

He was not stopped from 1907-1914.

Some of the matches you mention happened when he was very young or old. One of the Losses to Sam Mcvey I read was a bad decision

 

So Johnson was only at his best weight once in his career? Sounds a bit silly. Besides Johnson lied about a few things. He said the Willard fight was fixed. He said his jaw was never so sore after fighting Ketchel, a middle who floored him.

Johnson’s best performances came below 200 pounds. Fighters can add or lose weight to prepare for an opponent.

The Langford I saw at 185 3/4 in 1913 would beat Johnson. Not that giving up 20-30 pounds mattered much to Langford. He was the harder puncher and more durable man in just about every fight he had.

 

Once again, 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! Did he really lose to Mcvey and Flynn cleanly, or was it a bad call? Research is what I requested.

Had Johnson fought this often vs. the same competition Langford did, he's losing more than 4 times Johnson.
If you want to use Clay's book as the authority, he thinks Langford was just 20 years old an estimated 156 pounds when he meet Johnson.

If you want to use a sample of the same fighter fought from 1907-1914, Langford towers over Johnson regarding conclusive results, partially vs. the weak title opponents he selected.

I also mentioned Johnson's losses to Hart in 1905, dubious results of a draw and a DQ vs. McCormick who wasn't very good, getting TKO'd by Smith in a 4 round exhibition match as champion.

History has it wrong; Jack was not as great as they say, he struggled often.

If you want to look at his total fights from 1909 to 1915, he fought ten men.

A quick summary of Johnson's title run.:

1909 O'Brien, many say was the better in the 6 round affair, a feather fisted guy under 170 pounds past his best. Where is this vaunted defense? O'Brien landed his jab often. Johnson listed at 205, just three pounds from you view of his best weight.

1909 Ross - Winner of just 1 of his last 8, he hurt Johnson. Wow. How Ross got a shot us beyond me, and how he hurt Johnson with the one clean punch he landed suggests a suspect chin.

1909 Kaufman - Okay, Johnson he beat someone easily, but Kaufman was Ko'd by 4 other fighters from 1911-
1912, so this is hardly an impressive win.

1909 Ketchel- Floored and hurt by a middle, according to Johnson he was hurt. Is he lying?

1910 Jeffries, took 15 rounds to finish a guy who was 35 and out of the ring for 6 years.

1911 Flynn - A DQ win, and according to Senya13 who had sources at ringside, Johnson was losing steam, with Flynn fresh. While Johnson was in the lead, what does a lead mean in a fight 40 rounds or more when only 8 rounds have passed?

1913 Battling Jim Johnson - Jack was lucky to escape with a draw, not one judge voted for him, and if this was more than 10 rounds might have lost the title.

1914 Moran - Films surviving shows this one was close. Moran wasn't very good or excellent, just better than say about half of the white hopes of the time.

1915 Willard - KO'd Johnson, surviving films shows the rounds were close

Summary: very suspect vs two super middle weights ( any modern champ would be embarrassed by this ), let a guy who won 1 of his last 8 hurt him, took forever to stop an old and tired man, had a DQ win over Flynn, who was not hurt, was lucky vs. a journeyman in Battling Jim Johnson, edged just an above average white hope. Ko'd for the count vs the best he fought. Can you think of one other great heavyweight champion that would struggle like this vs the same men?

His best clean win in title defense could be Moran, and that should be a draw dropper as he was maybe 7th best of the times between 1909-1915.

Its not like Johnson fought Langford, Jeannette, Smith, McVey, Wills or even say Clarke from 1909-1915, At the very least a re-match vs Battling Jim would have been nice