I hope some of our resident historians and authors have a look at this and give a few opinions...(and anybody else who wants to!) Take the young Langford who in the time frame of 1904-05 was fighting the likes of Gans, Blackburn, and Walcott against Packy McFarland who fought his best around 140lbs. Is this a mismatch for Sam? Consider this...after a two year layoff, McFarland step into the ring and fought to a draw against Mike Gibbons, the leading middleweight contender at a catchweight. Gibbons, who in his next few fights, would outpoint the likes of Jeff Smith, Ted 'Kid' Lewis, and Jack Dillon. It was noted that McFarland was 'slicker' and better defensive fighter than the 'St.Paul Phantom', in the draw...Given Gibbons reputation as a master boxer, that is saying something! How would McFarland fare against the immortal Langford? Does he have a chance?
I feel that McFarland can't possibly hurt Sam. But I wonder if McFarland's skill set is being sold short here? Impressive record against quality opponents...Welch,Britton, and the leading middleweight contender in Gibbons (after a two year layoff!) McFarland just might outpoint the young Langford at 140 lbs...above that Langford would problably be too much.
This sounds about right. If McFarland knows what he is up against and prepares acordingly he should be able to take the 18 year old Langford.
Any young version of Sam Langford, probably up to 160 pounds, would be outpointed rather easily by McFarland. It would be a combination of Sam's losses to Danny Duane, Jack Blackburn and Dave Holly, just more clear (if this is prime McFarland he'll take every round without exception) and as I said, I wouldn't be surprised if the accumulation of punches is too much and Langford is worn down to stoppage. Packey would be the aggressor, and he was too good at blocking and angles and footwork to allow Sam to establish his jab and keep McFarland off.
I have to admit McFarland is a guy that I know very little about. And you make a very good point about Langford's losses to men like Duane, Blackburn and Holly. But I'm curious as to how you would compare McFarland with Gans. I took a look at McFarland's list of opponents and initially wasn't all that impressed over the first half of his career, but later came upon his victories over men like Freddie Welsh, Jimmy Brit, Leach Cross, Jack Britton, and Mike Gibbons. He certainly doesn't appear to have fought anywhere near the caliber of competition that Langford was in his first three years, although to tell the truth I've never even heard of most of the guys McFarland fought in 1904-1906. By the way, J.J. Johnston and Don Cogswell will be coming out with a new book in the near future about ten men they consider boxing's greatest uncrowned champions that will include McFarland.
In my opinion, McFarland was the best fighter P4P between Joe Gans and Benny Leonard eras (yes, ahead of Langford too). A match-up with Joe Gans is too difficult for me to deside. It is well known that Packey and his manager didn't want him to meet Gans in late 1907 and early 1908, considering it to be too much for still inexeperienced McFarland. I'd probably take McFarland to gain close decision over Benny Leonard (prime for prime), although I should fill up the multiple gaps in my scrapbook on Leonard for 1920's, before I'm confident enough in my pick.
And regarding McFarland's opponents in 1904-1906, it is most likely that that record was made up by Packey's manager in order to boost his fighter, as was usual the case with many fighters of that era. All I can say, Grand Rapids (MI) Evening Press' writers and local spectators were very impressed with what they saw when McFarland beat Eddie Preston on Jan 24, 1906, although Packey was rather wild at the time ("Twice in the second round the 17-year-old boy boxer fell to the floor when Preston side-stepped his rushes").
