Langford or Pep, who has the better resume?

Alright, jeez! You're an objective Pep fan, I get it.

 

I actually feel so bad about that last post I made that I am going to edit it.

Genuine post.

 

I literally see no way you could argue this for Pep.

 

True, but those factors carry far less weight than quality of opposition. If I fight your grandmother 10 times over a two year period, I'm 10-0.

If you fight my older brother, who is a very large and capable fighter, 10 times over a two year period and went 6-4 in a series of brutal contests, who deserves more credit, me or you? I have dominance, loss-avoidance, etc. in my corner. But you were the one who had the far superior opposition.

An extreme example, but I think you get my point:smoke

 

Willie Pep by a country mile. Pep holds the record for the greatest PRIME record of 132-1-1 beating 14 world champions and as many top 10 rated contenders... Langford drew 7 of his first 15 fights and could barely string together more than 5 or 6 victories in a row for the rest of his career, Langford also lost to many fighters who had more losses on their record than they had wins. Sam lost many times to almost every name opponent on his record with many of those losses being by KO. his victories over Ketchel and Blackburn are debatable with newspapers of the day divided on who won the fight. Sam suffered KO losses to fighters who had not fought more than a handful of fights and was KOd and beaten with ease by unknown fighters. this compared to the prime record of Will O`The Wisp Willie Pep who went 132-1-1 is simply not camparable.

 

we may as well say Marion Wilson has a better record than both as he fought almost every heavyweight champion of the last 30yrs yet got poleaxed by them yet still fought them... Willie Pep's record of 132-1-1 is the greatest prime record in boxing history and that is a fact which is in the boxing book of records

 

wtf

 

many of those fighters you name KOd Langford otherwise if you want to use your thesis then many fighters fought a whole list of world champions yet never defeated a single one of them.... Pep went 132-1-1 including beating 14 world champions while Langford lost to loads of fighters who had not fought more than a handful of fights throughout his entire career... you are omitting the fact that Johnson nearly killed Langford when they fought as well as Gans & Walcott was at the tail end of their career and was shop worn old fighters.. You then ignore the 14 world champions who Pep beat as well as the long list of top 10 challengers. your dismissing a record of 132-1-1 with 14 world champions on it...then glorifying a brutal beating by Jack Johnson as evidence of a greater achievement

 

is that it ?