Is Sam Langford the most under rated heavyweight of all time head to head?

Sam Langford is a great boxer. However he fought in a time when even Heavyweights were not as big as they are in more modern times. I'm sure someone is going to point the one or two guys who were big by today's standerds from back than. However let me point out the way boxers fight has also changed. The more modern big man is a safty first Jabber who is never going to let the smaller Langford 5′ 6½″&2" reach. Anywhere near them.
I would be hesant to pick Langford against any Heveyweight champion post World War 2. I think his best chance wold be against Marciano who he has a 5" reach advantage on.

 

Jeannette was no powder puff puncher with his 68 knockout wins, but Sam makes him look like one in Paris. Wills had to wait until Langford was past 35 before a peak Harry could finally take him out and avenge the two one punch knockout wins Sam had already posted on him.

 

Langford was dropped over 17 times, and some of them were not punchers.
Tut 38%
Barry21%
Flynn 17%
I rate Sam highly, but he was not super man.

 

it's interesting, i do think he's underrated in general but i think there may be a slight double standard with him. he's heralded as a great heavyweight fighter, which is true. but his heavyweight loses are often excused because of his relative size or lack of fitness, while his heavyweight wins are lauded because of his relative size.

if he's a heavyweight fighter, he should be judged as a heavyweight. which means no excuses for loses based on size and his wins should be judged according for a heavyweight fighter. it's true he was brilliant and conquered many, many bigger fighters. but he seems to be in a perfect position historically in that if he wins it's amazing and if he loses it's understandable and forgiving

 

You have nailed it .
" You can have your cake, and eat it too" Bob Dylan.

 

The vast majority of Jeannette 's kos [ around 90%] , were acheived
over overmatched journeymen, he was a great defensive fighter with one of the most padded stoppage records ever.
Take a look at WHO he stopped ,NOT how many.
It makes me laugh some posters question the durability of Jack Johnson's chin ,yet he was never on the floor ,even a third of the times Langford was.
Johnson fought Jeanette multiple times ,Jeannette" no powder puff puncher ", never floored him ,never even had him in distress.
Jeannette was not a puncher, of the four great black fighters, operating as contempories he would appear to carry the least power.

 

Langford also fought 3 times as much as Jack Johnson, and against tougher opposition. He was an aggressive fighter who was 5'6 and around 180 pounds at heavyweight while Johnson was a defensive, 200+ pound boxer. No surprise he was knocked down more than a few times.

 

I think he's in a tough position really because he was under-sized for a heavyweight no question, aside from him how many heavyweights of his height were there, yet he let himself go physically and did not compete for as long in the lower weight divisions. He also barely lost a fight during his true peak from around 1908 to 1913, only a handful of fighters could claim disputed wins over him. Imagine Langford having a similar series of fights against the middleweights of his time as he had against the top heavyweights, it's easy to imagine him coming out on top, though it should be taken into account that the faster, more skilled and elusive men probably troubled Sam more than the slow, plodding heavyweights who lacked the skill.

 

As Jorodz so perceptively stated if you are going to rate him as a heavyweight don't give him credit for being a small one.
Tougher opposition?
Who did Langford fight that would have been a threat to Johnson?

 

Langford is credited with 256 fights ,lets say 300
Johnson had about 100.
Let us not forget however ,that over 60 of Langford's fights were against assorted lightweights welters and middles.
And that we are judging him here ,as a heavyweight.

 

I agree with Jorodz and I don't rate Langford so highly head-to-head, but it's not like we can ignore how small he was compared to most heavyweights. It's incredible that he would compete against 6'3, 210 pound men. This has more effect to his pound for pound status though, as he did have his losses as well during the latter part of his career.

Langford fought tougher opposition than Johnson and I don't think this can be argued against. If Johnson fought the men Langford did as many times, he would have dropped a few fights here and there. Johnson was even DQ'd against a novice Jeannette and struggled against Battling Jim. He never stayed consistently in shape, and neither did Langford.

 

He's credited with 316 bouts, possibly more. Johnson 93. Johnson also fought middleweights and light heavies, and was KO'd by Choynski early on in his career.