Can someone who has Langford All-Time #1

Resume dear boy, resume.

In terms of depth he is about as good as you can get.

 

Resume, was successful in several weight classes, longevity.

 

Think McGrain has him number 1. I dont personally, but based on resume, i certainly understand the argument for it

 

Greb has the better, more consistent resume I think. And while Greb did fight opponents multiple times, it wasn't quite on the level of Langford's habit, such as fighting Wills 21 times. But, Langford went from LW to HW(while Greb went from MW to HW), having similar success all the way through, and a decent number of his losses are said to be thrown fights, which is hardly difficult to believe in that era. I'll take Greb slightly over him still, based on resume and what I know of them as fighters. I do believe, however, that Langford is a top 4 lock along with Robinson, Greb, and Armstrong. After that it's all about preference.

 

Greb did not beat big heavyweights like sam did. greb in fact did not fight big top heavyweights. thats where they differ. sams is better.

 

I don't think so, not at all. This is P4P. Greb was naturally smaller than Langford, regardless of where a teenaged Langford started his career. Langford's best was around 185 pounds, while Greb's best was under 160, often facing much bigger men. Langford was the more natural HW, therefore he faced the bigger Heavyweights, but even as a natural MW(rarely if ever weighing more than 170) Greb ranked in the top 10 HW's 7 years in a row. This all despite his true best being at MW and LHW. I know you dislike Gene Tunney and rate him lower than pretty much anyone on this site, but those are bigger wins than any of Langford's in my book, including Wills.

 

If your talking about p4p, Langford beat Joe Gans, who p4p is better than Gene Tunney. Same with Joe Walcott barbadoes. I dont dislike tunney, I dont dislike any fighter. I simply dont think as much of his accomplishments at heavyweight as other people do.

 

Where do you think willie pep stands?

 

unfortunate that his opportunities were limited due to racial prejudices at the time!!

 

Well below those guys. His resume is nowhere near theirs. His rating stands on his consistence, dominance, skills, and comeback, as well as a very good resume, but not on that level. I'm on the cusp of -re-ranking Pep as it is, though I currently have him just outside of the top 10.

 

Is this because you simply do not know alot about the Featherweight/lightweight division of the 1940s so you dont know many of the fighters pep beat? There is a heck of alot more to peps resume than just saddler and angott. Multiple hall of famers, a VERY STRONG featherweight division, Pep took out his mandatory # 1 contenders 9 years in a row, he entirley wiped out his whole division more than any champion in history. I mean he beat every good featherweight of the decade.


On film, he is EASILY top 10 fighter of all time talent. In fact hes top 5 talent. If you cannot see this, then I dont know what to say.

 

When did I ever say Angott and Saddler were his only competition? You seem to think that's all I know of Pep, when I only mentioned Angott one time. You're taking this a bit too far.

I know the majority of his top wins, such as Chalky Wright, Ray Famechon, Jackie Graves, Manuel Ortiz, etc. I was simply saying his resume doesn't compare to those guys I pointed out earlier. And it most certainly doesn't. Nor does it compare to guys like Charles and Robinson's resumes.

Skill-wise I agree with you.

 

I will come out with a mini willie pep article on his resume later tonight. I will be as unbias and clear as possible, I will hope all of you will read it.


PS out of the names you listed, you missed a bunch of better fighters than ray famechon, jackie graves.

 

I was naming off the top of my head, a guy like Willie Joyce no doubt belongs in there as well.