Should Langford?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by mcvey, Jan 30, 2010.


  1. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member

    98,716
    30,652
    Jun 2, 2006
    Should Sam Langford be considered an ATG at LHVY?
    If so, how does he do against.

    Spinks
    Tunney
    Charles
    Moore
    Foster

    ??????
     
  2. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    279
    Jul 22, 2004
    Probably but if so Patterson should also
     
  3. mattdonnellon

    mattdonnellon Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,779
    2,119
    Dec 2, 2006
    He didn't really operate at lightheavy weight and seemed to fly through the weight class on to heavyweight. The other guys also operated at heavyweight and I could see Sam beating the lot of them.
     
  4. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member

    98,716
    30,652
    Jun 2, 2006
    Do you think he would have made a" non pareil" legacy at 175lbs?
     
  5. janitor

    janitor VIP Member

    71,999
    28,010
    Feb 15, 2006
    That is partly because the light heavyweight division was not verry highly regarded back then.

    If the question is "who was the best fighter under 175 lbs that ever was" then the answer is probably Sam Langford.
     
  6. mattdonnellon

    mattdonnellon Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,779
    2,119
    Dec 2, 2006
    Do any of ye know when Sam outgrew 175?
     
  7. janitor

    janitor VIP Member

    71,999
    28,010
    Feb 15, 2006
    If he had chosen to make a career at that weight he could probably have made it for a long time.
     
  8. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member

    98,716
    30,652
    Jun 2, 2006
    I think you are probably right ,Sam went after the money,which was not in the lightly regarded Lhvy division,eg Burns did not even bother to claim the title when he beat O Brien ,though both were inside the limit.
    Sam had huge shoulders and arms ,but his legs were not that big,certainly not as chunky as Burns' who played high level lacrosse.
    I tend to think a 5 ' 7' Langford was carrying surplus ,when he campaigned at heavyweight.
    How much more efficient would he have been at his optimum weight?
    Possibly he would take the mantle that currently sits on Charles shoulders?
     
  9. My2Sense

    My2Sense Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,935
    100
    Aug 21, 2008
    From what I've read about Langford, I've surmised that his ideal/natural weight was probably around super-middle. Personally, I've always rated him among the top 10, if not top 5 LHWs. However, of all the fighters listed, I would probably favor all except Foster to beat him, as I believe most of them were more well-rounded and versatile than Langford.
     
  10. dmt

    dmt Hardest hitting hw ever Full Member

    13,322
    20,842
    Jul 2, 2006
    I rate him #2 on my atg light leavy list, just behind Charles. He looks good on the limited footage we have of him. But its very hard to judge him in head to head matchups because of the limited film available.
     
  11. Bummy Davis

    Bummy Davis Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    23,796
    2,396
    Aug 26, 2004
    Spinks....Langford by UD
    Tunney...Tunney by UD
    Charles....Charles by UD
    Moore.....Moore by UD
    Foster....Langford by TKO
     
  12. techks

    techks ATG list Killah! Full Member

    19,779
    704
    Dec 6, 2009
    Langford was a freak of nature. Anyone who moves from lightweight to heavyweight and still knocks people out really has incredible power.
     
  13. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. Full Member

    55,255
    10,363
    Jun 29, 2007
    Yes. Langford had a rare mix of durability, power, skills, and speed. He could fight all night, and was too strong to be controlled in the clinches, and too determined to take the easy way out, even in a style disadvantage.
     
  14. WhataRock

    WhataRock Loyal Member Full Member

    36,582
    21,315
    Jul 29, 2004
    I have him top 10 there.