Ortiz is a very good boxer, but we know that one punch can end his night if he's timed and countered. He'd have to fight tall, rangy and safety first to beat Langford, but I can't help but feel Tham only needs one opportunity and he'll get it.
Considering Langford wasn't a natural HW he knocked out all the best HW fighters who'd get in the ring with him. Too evolved? What is it Ortiz does better than Langford in your opinion?
No there's an increasing amount of posters who favour the modern fighter without actually watching the older fighter fight. People watching Langford and Ortiz and concluding Ortiz is better, fine by me, its a subjective sport. But people not watching them and just going with the modern guy, it just isn't right lol.
Ortiz has better technique, picks his punches better, far bigger, sharper counterpunching, I don’t see what Langford can do with him, he was a lightweight who became a heavyweight, nobody could have success doing that today because boxers are better schooled and know how to use their size advantage, boxers from the early 1900s are sloppy compared to modern fighters and would be picked apart by good Boxers of today, boxers weren’t taught as well back then and trainers didn’t have nearly as good knowledge as they have today because boxing had just started really, do you really believe Langford would beat Ortiz or is it just wishful thinking?
Which fights have you watched of the two that convince you Ortiz is a sharper counter puncher? Langford knocked out Tiger Flowers with a counter punch when medically blind. If that doesn't make him the best counter puncher of all time I don't know what does. I'll ignore all the sweeping statements, things have to be evaluated case by case. Why would it be wishful thinking? We're talking a long retired Canadian vs a soon to be retired Cuban, why would anyone have a favourite in that matchup?