I dont think this is that far fetched. Wilder is very amateurish, its not like hes some Sugar Ray Robinson clone. And hes no heavier than some of the guys Langford KOd. Hes about the same size as Bill Tate, who Langford fought several times (although Wilder is much more dangerous than Tate). His height would pose a problem but its not like hes some jab and run fighter. He throws wild, looping punches and against a guy like Langford who was very smart and savvy hed have to be punching down. If he over-shot the target, which he often does, Langford would be ready and make him pay. From there it comes down to whether Wilder can take his punches. If he can, Langford is in trouble. Its a more interesting fight than the people writing it off as a joke would have you believe. Itd be interesting. Just based on size and power alone Id lean towards Wilder but I wouldnt give him a huge edge. Maybe 60/40. Langford is being undersold here and was a lot smarter and more modern than some of these clowns like dubblechin think.
Langford was a lightweight/welterweight fighting at HW, a hundred KOs at HW is nothing to sneer at, not to mention KOes over several ATGs
I'm convinced that Langford KOs everyone Wilder has beat, but still he's blasted out by Wilder, probably in less than a round. And a 5"7 WW fighting at HW is the best win in Boxing today
I think the Wilder fans forget the Chagaev-Valuev fight and to me Valuev was far better than this joke Wilder with his pathetic thin legs..
Nice story, but Langford did beat fighters that much taller than him and these fighters weren't barroom saloon brawlers.
Excellent point, how would Wilder find his overhand right against such a short target, who's also quite savvy defensively?
Assuming that he would find him with that right hand. Wilder doesn't use uppercuts and wild overhand right against someone that much smaller is not a good weapon. People here really believe that Langford would just walk into the punch without any kind of defense, which is ridiculous. Langford is far better fighter and boxer than Wilder and only physical disadvantages makes it interesting.
http://i40.tinypic.com/292l5z6.png This is how the size difference would look like. Tate was a bit bigger than Wilder, but not a huge difference.