Sam Langford V s Archie Moore??

Too clever. Different eras if the rules are in Moore’s favour he wins.... If it’s in Langford’s well I’d go with Sam by KO at some point.

 

Langford had right style to thrive in 1940s rules though. Moore also was well suited to fight in the 1910s.

 

We don’t know any of that.

 

We know nothing in hypothetical matchups, but we can assume something.

 

Well I give the chin and power edge to Sam.On defence Langford walking in somewhat open against Lang is no indication as to how he would approach Archie.Langford was drawing leads from Lang by giving him opportunities so he could counter , he had no reason to fear Lang's power he wouldn't do that against a puncher like Moore imo .Langford also had his gloves doctored with the hard horse hair stuffing being replaced with rabbit's fur by the promoter. Sam stopped McVey,Wills, and Jeannette,I don't know if Moore could have done that.

 

Langford used different approach on defense against Jeannette, so it's a given he wouldn't fight vs Moore like he did in Lang fight.

 

I remember putting up this matchup in a thread about nearly twenty years ago on a forum, and was initially puzzled when an ultra old timer wrote that ‘Moore wouldn’t stand much of a chance here,’ but after he broke it down in terms of a level playing field, he had had me convinced. Langford inside 5.

 

I struggle to see what advantages Langford has over Moore. I have seen Langfords fights but a lot more of Moore. From my perspective, Moore is probably better in every aspect besides reach, toughness, and power. In a Nutshell while I acknowledge Langford was a talented and skillful fighter, Moore is just straight up better imo. In my eyes it would look similar to Embrell Davidson vs Moore but spanned across a few more rounds, atleast on my current understanding of Langfords abilities