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

I don't know. About the same. But I feel I'm gving Tyson his props by comparing his durability to Langford's, rather than the other way around.
Langford was proven to be "tougher", to a very damaging degree.

 

Langford fought and beat good 210 - 220 pounders.

He fought well at anywhere from 165 - 205 himself.

 

Nonsense.

 

He's 200 pounds here ?

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvdt3xm3ql0[/ame]


What was the exact date of the fight ?
The caption says "Langford Jeannette 10", I don't know if that's accurate or not.

Whatever Sam weighed, he sure looks strong and tough enough to me.
People who knew more compared him to Joe Louis, that's enough for me.

 

I'm pretty confident this natural middleweight, who even fought at 140lbs, wouldn't have raw power up there with the some of the most heavy-handed punchers in history, but each to their own.

I can't see him momentarily stunning Tyson, let alone finishing him.

He'd take them better than Louis would his.

 

Johnson never lost to Jeannette, apart from that dsq, and he dominated McVey in their series.Jack had pretty good reasons for not being at his best against Battling Jim ,he was 35 years old out of shape ,and had a broken arm after the third round.
If I have given the impression I am down on Langford, I would like to redress it .I consider him in the top 4 p4p of all time.
Heavyweight is a different story though,I'm not sure he would even crack my top 10.

N.B.
Langford was stopped by that novice Jeannette ,and stopped by Welterweight, Young Peter Jackson.

 

Thanks for the testimonials, Janitor.

Langford is tremendously underrated. Those who haven't read reports / testimonials or seen his films think he was a short turn of the century fighter with limited skills.

Langford was a once in a generation type of fighter. Its a pity Jack Johnson never gave Sam Langford a title shot. If Johnson's paid sparring partners tell you ( Gunboat Smith ) Sam would have beaten him that to me says it all. The newly discovered Langford vs. Jeanette film stamps Langford as a true head to head threat for anyone.

A few years ago, I had Sam 17th on my head to head list. After watching the Jeanette film, I might move him up a tad.

 

A 5'6 HW isn't have any success against men like Lewis, Ali, Bowe, Klitschkos, Holmes and obviously Johnson who beat him easily. He may have success against Dempsey, Marciano, Spinks, Jeffries as most of those will engage him and his swarming styles may bother Louis, or he may just get taken apart by the Bomber. Going toe-toe with a Tyson with a reach and size advantage is a recipe for an early KO

 

Why rate a man out of his prime when he was dropped? Tut? Are you serious?

Langford's prime to near prime to near prime years were 1907-1916. During these years he likely had 100 fights ( too lazy to count now ) and was never stopped. Sam, unlike Jack Johnson went up against the cream of the crop prime contenders during these years. Many of whom could really punch.

On film Langford is not great on defense from a distance, and he employed a chase you down stalker type of style, which meant he was willing to risk being hit, in exchange for landing his bombs.

I'd say Langford's chin is elite, and extremely battle tested. Even more so that Liston's or Marciano's

 

Thanks Mcgrain. I have been very busy lately! Keep in mind this is Rickard, who wanted to promote Johnson's next match " inside view ". There is no proof Jeffries said that himself. Allegedly some sports writer claimed that. This is not a primary source. I have Jeffries words in full interview after the fight, and his statement there was if he was younger, he would have won. That is the primary source. Which source do you value more, a primary direct quote source, or an indirect source that fails to list the interviewer / news writer? Also did you know Rickard, who made a fourtune on the fight wanted to see a re-match?

 

I don't want to have this thread be distracted by non-Langford talk, BUT I can't help asking : If Rickard wanted a rematch why would he quote Jeffries saying THAT ?
That's the worst possible line for a rematch.

 

thanks bouch:good

 

No he was not. He was as close to that as any fighter every could be though.

 

interesting take. i've recently held the opinion that if he can "beat" one of the best lightweights ever (gans), welters (walcott) and middles (ketchel) than he could have dominated the lower weights easily, seeking heavy only for glory and fame. in the end though, your opinion that sam may have had more trouble with mobile, "skilled" fighters is well taken. dempsey loved fighting giants, as did lewis and maybe a lot of langfords success at heavy was due to him wisely exploiting advantages in speed, skill and manuverability. this may not have been possible had he stuck with 160-175