Ok my friend, I want to know what results indicate that Sullivan is vulnerable/not vulnerable to epic pressure counter-punchers and what are the best results Langford enjoyed versus massive-punching speed merchants?
It might be hard for us to say. But then we have a good angle on both fighters. What will people who have an angle on one or neither say?
Sullivan is pressure, Langford is counter-pressure. This gives Langford the advantage. In terms of style. Other than that, there is little to say. Sullivan is the best puncher that Langford has ever faced. Langford is the best fighter that Sullivan has ever faced.
Based on M of Q rules I like Langford since he fought several hundred times more under the rules against a much more diversified body of opponents .... in a no holds barred, there are very few I'd take over John L.
I hereby declare the thread as moot. John L. would not fight "The Boston Terror" unless Lanford donned a reverse minstrel costume with white face and all.
If Sullivan did not hold a title at the time, then he would probably fight Langford for a suficiently large purse.
A pre-prime Langford wanted no part of Jeffries. A peak Sullivan in top condition was likewise a powerful, thick, rugged man. He had to come down in size, while Sam had to come up in weight. John L. would clearly be a super heavyweight today. 15 miles of daily roadwork and strict dieting only brought him down to a reported 212 for Kilrain, and he was still noticeably overweight and past his best for that one. A peak Sullivan, coming in at 190 or 195, is a bad man to concede height, weight and reach to. Langford was just barely 27 and embarking on the best streak of his life when Fireman Flynn III, the only scheduled 45 rounder of his career, was filmed on St. Patrick's Day, 1910. We can lament the dearth of Greb footage, but we can also see what a peak Langford looked like.
