Does Langford-Hague exist on film?

Clay you dont know how much time I spend doing anything. Or what I do in regards to my book. If your book had been half as well researched or thorough as mine already is you wouldnt be done yet either. You might say: "Steve, if you hadnt spent time acquiring sources for me you might be done with your book by now." Because a good many of the first person accounts you use you got from me! But dont worry, next time you can find someone more thorough than me to find you film on Langford that no one has ever seen, or multiple first hand accounts on Langford fights that at the time didnt even have dates associated with them, or which burst myths that you were still clinging to in your book, or who can give you Billy Miske's daughters contact information, etc. etc. Yeah I'll just stopping helping ungrateful people like yourself and focus on my book...

We can "disagree" on that point which your entire argument/defense rests upon but lets face it. Thats bull****. You know it, I know it, and anyone who knows me or even reads my posts, trades with me, or tries to contact me about films knows that I for damn sure would not have agreed to let you see something like that without asking you to keep it to yourself. Even you admit that while you were at our friends house I asked to speak to you on the phone. Is everyone here supposed to believe I just got on the phone with you and said "hey congratulations you are about to watch one of the holy grails of boxing films and then just hung up???" get real. I asked to speak with you, as you well know, to expressly ask you to keep this to yourself. Period. You know that and I know that, and anyone with half a brain can see that an eleventh hour phone call to you when I had never spoken to you over the phone before wasnt meant to just say hi. Whether you choose to "remember" it or "agree" on it here in front of the court of public opinion as you say doesnt matter now.

Yes as far as Im concerned our relationship is beyond repair and its because what most of this thread has been talking about. You didnt honor something that was asked of you for what I consider a very kind favor. Then you have the nerve to say "you didnt respond to me when I tried to reach out to you in private and instead put this all out in public forums." Thats a nice comment coming from someone who did the exact opposite by taking something in confidence and putting it in public and then trying to make amends in private!

So you are going to stab me in the back and then apologize in private for it all the while protesting in public that you dont remember you were asked not to discuss that? Im supposed to feel bad about that? Get real. And dont forget, Im not the only one that this effected by you doing that. Im not talking about our mutual friend either. Im just the only one here talking about it.

I want to make something else clear to those who might be reading this. In regards to this business with Clay I keep referring to myself in the first person in order to keep other parties involved in this endeavor out of the argument.

 

klompton, thanks for your answers. makes a lot of sense when you reference it to your collection.

I don't know what it is about these rare films from boxing's history but once the hook's in it's hard to shake. Studying old time boxing is kind of like diving into a pool and bobbing up in an ocean.

 

Bull, Klompton, or anyone else who has purchased films, I have two question.

1 ) What would an incomplete film of Langford vs. Hague go for that shows two rounds, the 1st and the 4th including the knockout sell for?

2 ) What is the highest amount in dollars you have seen a boxing film demand?

 

Clay you dont know how much time I spend doing anything. Or what I do in regards to my book. If your book had been half as well researched or thorough as mine already is you wouldnt be done yet either. You might say: "Steve, if you hadnt spent time acquiring sources for me you might be done with your book by now." Because a good many of the first person accounts you use you got from me! (BUNK, SURE YOU SENT SOME MATERIAL MY WAY ABOUT LANGFORD, BUT NOWHERE NEAR AS MUCH AS MANY OTHER FOLKS LIKE BEN HAWES, J.J. JOHNSTON, BARRY DESKINS, LANGFORD’S GREAT NIECE, OR A HOST OF OTHERS IN TERMS OF FIRST HAND ACCOUNTS. AND IT’S NOT LIKE I HAVEN’T SENT THE SAME KIND OF MATERIAL YOU’RE WAY. FOR EXAMPLE, THE PICTURE OF GREB PLAYING HANDBALL THAT YOU’D NEVER SEEN BEFORE. BUT I MAKE NO CLAIM OF HAVING PROVIDE YOU WITH ANY INFORMATION YOU MAY NOT HAVE COME ACROSS ON YOUR OWN. TO LISTEN TO YOU HERE ONE MIGHT THINK YOU’RE LARGELY RESPONSIBLE FOR MUCH OF THE MATERIAL IN MY BOOK. B.S. MISKE’S DAUGHTER? I’VE RECEIVED NOTHING OF ANY USE FOR THAT BOOK FROM HERE, ZIP.) But dont worry, next time you can find someone more thorough than me to find you film on Langford that no one has ever seen, or multiple first hand accounts on Langford fights that at the time didnt even have dates associated with them, or which burst myths that you were still clinging to in your book, or who can give you Billy Miske's daughters contact information, etc. etc. Yeah I'll just stopping helping ungrateful people like yourself and focus on my book...(NO PROBLEM, YOU WON’T BE MISSED AT ALL)

We can "disagree" on that point which your entire argument/defense rests upon but lets face it. Thats bull****. You know it, I know it, and anyone who knows me or even reads my posts, trades with me, or tries to contact me about films knows that I for damn sure would not have agreed to let you see something like that without asking you to keep it to yourself. Even you admit that while you were at our friends house I asked to speak to you on the phone. (NOPE, THE WAY I REMEMBER IT IS THAT YOU TWO WERE ON THE PHONE WHEN I WALKED IN AND HE POINTED THAT OUT AND I’M PRETTY SURE HE SUGGESTED WE SPEAK TO ONE ANOTHER, BUT I COULD BE WRONG, MAYBE YOU DID ASK TO SPEAK TO ME SINCE WE’D BEEN COMMUNICATING BY EMAIL FOR SOME TIME AT THAT POINT AND HAD NEVER ACTUALLY SPOKEN ON THE PHONE. IT DAMN SURE WASN’T A POINTED CONVERSATION OF SOME KIND WITH YOU DICTATING THE TERMS OF MY BEING ABLE TO WATCH A VIDEO.) Is everyone here supposed to believe I just got on the phone with you and said "hey congratulations you are about to watch one of the holy grails of boxing films and then just hung up???" get real. I asked to speak with you, as you well know, to expressly ask you to keep this to yourself. Period. (BULL****) You know that and I know that, and anyone with half a brain can see that an eleventh hour phone call to you when I had never spoken to you over the phone before wasnt meant to just say hi. Whether you choose to "remember" it or "agree" on it here in front of the court of public opinion as you say doesnt matter now.

Yes as far as Im concerned our relationship is beyond repair and its because what most of this thread has been talking about. You didnt honor something that was asked of you for what I consider a very kind favor. Then you have the nerve to say "you didnt respond to me when I tried to reach out to you in private and instead put this all out in public forums." Thats a nice comment coming from someone who did the exact opposite by taking something in confidence and putting it in public and then trying to make amends in private!

So you are going to stab me in the back and then apologize in private for it all the while protesting in public that you dont remember you were asked not to discuss that? (NOPE, I HAD NO INTENTION OF APOLOGIZING FOR ANYTHING, JUST EXPLAINING MY STANCE.) Im supposed to feel bad about that? Get real. And dont forget, Im not the only one that this effected by you doing that. (YOU’RE PARTNER, OR AT LEAST THE ONLY ONE I ACTUALLY KNOW UNDERSTANDS THAT ALL BETS WERE OFF ONCE THE EXISTANCE OF THAT FILM ON THE WEBSITE BECAME KNOWN) Im not talking about our mutual friend either. Im just the only one here talking about it.

I want to make something else clear to those who might be reading this. In regards to this business with Clay I keep referring to myself in the first person in order to keep other parties involved in this endeavor out of the argument.
SO I HAD ANOTHER THOUGHT. IF YOU’RE UP TO A CHALLENGE HOW ABOUT WE GIVE THAT MEMORY OF YOURS A TEST AND DISPROVE I THEORY I NOW HAVE? EARLIER IN THIS THREAD YOU ACCUSED ME OF REVEALING YOUR NAME AS AN OWNER OF THE LANGFORD – JEANNETTE FILM SHORTLY AFTER I ENTERED A POST ON THIS SITE CLAIMING TO HAVE SEEN IT. YOU SAY YOU THEN IMMEDIATELY STARTED GETTING EMAILS DIRECTLY FROM HIM ABOUT TRADING WITH YOU FOR IT.
YESTERDAY WAS THE FIRST I HEARD ABOUT THAT, I.E., YOU GETTING ANY EMAILS DIRECTLY FROM HIM ABOUT TRADING FOR THAT LANGFORD-JEANNETTE FILM FROM YOU. YOU SAY YOU HAVE THOSE EMAILS. I RESPONDED AND SAID I DIDN’T GIVE HIM YOUR NAME, OR THAT OF ANY OF YOUR PARTNERS. YOU THEN BASICALLY IMPLIED I WAS LYING, AND ASKED ME IF I THOUGHT YOU WERE STUPID. RAGING BULL EVENTUALLY ADDS A POST LATER IN THE DAY IN WHICH HE SAY’S HE DIDN’T GET YOUR NAME FROM ME AND THAT HE DIDN’T EVEN KNOW YOU WERE ONE OF THE PARTIES WHO HAD THAT FILM UNTIL YOU REVEALED THAT YOURSELF. YOUR RESPONSE TO HIS POST INDICATES THAT YOU DON’T REALLY BELIEVE HIM EITHER.
SO HERE’S MY THEORY. MY GUESS IS THAT ANY EMAILS YOU HAVE FROM HIM DIRECTLY TO YOU WAY BACK THEN IN WHICH HE INQUIRES ABOUT TRADES FOR FILM WITH YOU DON’T SPECIFICALLY MENTION TRADING FOR THE LANGFORD-JEANNETTE FILM, BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE HE STILL HAD NO IDEA YOU HAD IT. INSTEAD I’M GUESSING THAT HE WAS FISHING AROUND TO LEARN WHAT RARE FILM YOU DID HAVE THAT HE MIGHT BE ABLE TO TRADE FOR BECAUSE YOU INDICATED IN THAT OLD THREAD THAT YOU HAD SOME VERY RARE FILM. I BELIEVE THAT THE ONLY OFFERS OF ANY ACTUAL FILM FROM HIM IN TRADE FOR THE LANGFORD-JEANNETTE WERE FIRST COMMUNICATED TO YOUR PARTNER BY ME VIA EMAIL BECAUSE YOU GUYS ASKED ME NOT TO REVEAL TO RAGING BULL THAT YOU WERE THE OWNERS OF THE FILM, AND YOU’RE NOW MIXING THIS UP IN YOUR FAULTY MEMORY BANKS AND THINKING THOSE OFFERS FROM HIM IN TRADE FOR THE LANGFORD-JEANNETTE FILM WERE DIRECT EMAILS WHEN IN FACT, THEY WERE NOT.
YOU’VE GOT THE EMAILS, RIGHT? NOW THAT YOU’VE IMPLIED WE’RE BOTH BEING UNTRUTHFUL CONCERNING THAT MATTER WHY DON’T YOU GO BACK AND LOOK AT THEM AND DISPROVE THIS THEORY.

 

hey klompton, why are you so obsessed about these films? is it a nice feeling to have a film that everyone wants to see yet only you have it and are not willing to share it?

it just goes to show what sort of person you are....sad.
its like me having the only one rarest pokemon card and me not even willing to show anyone what it looks like, take it to the grave with me...lol

PS. kudos to whoever released the langford jeannette film!

 

Why are you posting on a boxing forum if you arent interested in the sport?

I think Ive answered this question several times and ways. I love boxing. I love the history of boxing. If I want to watch an old time fighter I need to watch old film. If that old film is rare I need to purchase or trade for it from the person who owns it. If he has a lot of this film and tells me not to trade it or sell it then I have to listen to him or I wont be able to get more to see. I dont see why that doesnt make sense to some. If that shows what type of person I am (someone who likes to watch old boxing films and wants to see more) then so be it. If you find that type of person sad you are posting in the wrong forum.

 

i apologise for calling you sad. i got a little heated:fire
i now understand, i didnt know you trade boxing footage.

I thought you were some guy who happens to have a rare film by luck and was not willing to share it.
btw im also interested in boxing and its history...
peace :thumbsup

 

Dont deflect this to another argument Clay. The point is that you were told not discuss it and did. Thats the point you keep debating and its bull****. Period. Whether you told raging bull directly is neither here no there BUT here is raging bulls exact wording:

"Hi Steve,

I forgot to ask you a question last time which was wether or not you have a copy of the Sam Langford/Joe Jeanette fight? I ask because Clay Moyle saw footage from that fight that belongs to a private collector... ...so if you have it let me know man and if you don`t I`ll get in touch with Clay Moyle myself and see if I can get the contact information of his source and see if I can work something out with him to get a hold of that footage."


Now you are going to say "I didnt give him your name, and was never told not to talk about the film." Again, I call bull****. You may not have given him my name but you were indeed told NOT TO DISCUSS WHAT YOU SAW and did. You then used raging bull in order to try and acquire a copy of that film for yourself which both you and he admit. You can come on here and try to do damage control but I doubt anyone believes that as secretive and miserly as I supposedly am I just agreed to let you see that film with no stipulations. Thats ridiculous to ask these people to believe something that simple.

If you didnt tell raging bull my name directly fine, I have no problem with that, I dont care. The point is even if you didnt, and the above email makes it clear why that impression could be readily apparent (you start talking about Langford-jeanette and suddenly within a day or so I get an email about the fight from a guy naming you, and then later I hear how you are acting as an intermediary for the guy to try and negotiate it out of our friend...). Its not a huge leap and the whole point is that something that was supposed to be hushed up so we could use it wasnt. Instead you took every avenue you could to try and get at it. That much is obvious to everyone.

I called you childish to which you took offense and you were. You begged me for a cookie and I told you to be patient. I put the cookie jar on top of the fridge until after dinner and you started pulling up chairs, and trying to get your older sister to get one for you. I hope that cookie was sweet because it will be the last one get from anyone involved. Believe me, you lost a lot more in that bargain than I did or you gained from it.

 

Klompton, you're always bragging about what you have, what you've seen, you have stuff that nobody else knows exists, you know what does exist and what doesn't, you had it first, clearest copy etc etc.

You've been doing it for years on the various forums I've frequented. Is it really too much of a stretch to think that if a rare film was in circulation, that you would be in the know and worth touching up for a bit of info?

 

Now you are going to say "I didnt give him your name, and was never told not to talk about the film." Again, I call bull****. (WHATEVER, LIKE I SAID, I KNOW LONGER CARE WHAT YOU BELIEVE, IT’S YOUR PROBLEM AS FAR AS I’M CONCERNED) You may not have given him my name but you were indeed told NOT TO DISCUSS WHAT YOU SAW and did. (NOPE, AND REGARLDESS OF HOW YOU NOW TRY AND PAINT THAT ORIGINAL DISCUSSION BETWEEN US IT WON’T CHANGE A THING NOW) You then used raging bull in order to try and acquire a copy of that film for yourself which both you and he admit. (ABSOLUTE B.S. AFTER I ORIGINALLY POSTED ABOUT HAVING SEEN A FILM OF A LANGFORD-JEANNETTE FIGHT ON THIS SITE TO SUPPORT AN ARGUMENT I WAS MAKING AT THE TIME RAGING BULL THEN PM’D ME AND ASKED ME TO IDENTIFY THE OWNERS OF THE FILM. I TOLD HIM I’D HAVE TO CHECK AND SEE IF I COULD DO THAT, BUT YOUR PARTNER THEN TOLD ME YOU GUYS DIDN’T WANT YOUR NAMES REVEALED, SO I DIDN’T, AND THAT’S HOW I CAME TO FIND MYSELF PLAYING THE ROLE OF AN INTERMEDIARY TO CONVEY A FEW MESSAGES FROM HIM. I DIDN’T EVEN KNOW HIM AT THE TIME, AND AM PRETTY SURE I DIDN’T EVEN KNOW HIS NAME WAS CRAIG UNTIL YESTERDAY, BECAUSE WE ONLY HAD A FEW PM EXCHANGES SO I ONLY KNEW HIM BY THE NAME RAGING BULL.) You can come on here and try to do damage control but I doubt anyone believes that as secretive and miserly as I supposedly am I just agreed to let you see that film with no stipulations. Thats ridiculous to ask these people to believe something that simple. (THE ONLY REASON I CAME ON HERE WAS TO RESPOND TO YOUR ATTACK ON MY CHARACTER. AT THIS POINT, I THINK I’VE DONE THAT, WHATEVER YOU CHOOSE TO BELIEVE, OR ANYONE ELSE NOW NO LONGER CONCERNS ME. I’VE HAD MY SAY. I’M PRETTY SURE THAT ANYONE WHO HAS SPENT ANY TIME LOOKING AT THE HISTORY OF MANY OF YOUR EXCHANGES ON THIS WEBSITE, AND THE LANGUAGE YOU’VE USED, WILL VIEW YOU AS A PRETTY IMMATURE AND OFTEN IRRATIONAL INDIVIDUAL .)

If you didnt tell raging bull my name directly fine, I have no problem with that, I dont care. The point is even if you didnt, and the above email makes it clear why that impression could be readily apparent (you start talking about Langford-jeanette and suddenly within a day or so I get an email about the fight from a guy naming you, and then later I hear how you are acting as an intermediary for the guy to try and negotiate it out of our friend...). Its not a huge leap and the whole point is that something that was supposed to be hushed up so we could use it wasnt. Instead you took every avenue you could to try and get at it. That much is obvious to everyone. (I DON’T DENY FOR A MOMENT THAT I TRIED REPEATEDLY TO FIND A WAY TO TRADE FOR A COPY OF THE FILM WITH YOUR PARTNER, BUT I ABSOLUTELY DENY I DID ANYTHING BEYOND THAT. AT THE SAME TIME I WILL TELL YOU THAT I DON’T VIEW THAT ANY DIFFERENTLY THAN WHAT HE’S DONE WITH ME OVER THE PAST TWO YEARS IN REGARD TO A SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONAL BOXING BOOK THAT IS VERY SCARCE AND WAS WRITTEN BY ONE OF HIS FAVORITE FIGHTERS. HE’S BOMBARDED ME NONSTOP WITH OFFERS OF TRADES FOR THAT BOOK, AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT.)

I called you childish to which you took offense and you were. You begged me for a cookie and I told you to be patient. I put the cookie jar on top of the fridge until after dinner and you started pulling up chairs, and trying to get your older sister to get one for you. I hope that cookie was sweet because it will be the last one get from anyone involved. Believe me, you lost a lot more in that bargain than I did or you gained from it. (GREAT ANALOGY, ONLY YOU AND I DIDN’T HAVE ANY SUCH EXCHANGES, MY TRADE OFFERS ONLY TOOK PLACE WITH YOUR PARTNER AND THERE WAS NEVER ANY MESSAGE RECEIVED FROM YOU ABOUT BEING PATIENT TO GET A COPY AT SOME POINT. YOU’RE SUFFERING FROM DELUSIONS OF GRANDEUR IN TERMS OF ANY LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE YOU MAY HAVE HAD TO ME, OR WOULD HAVE GOING FORWARD.)

 

1. Whatever the market would bare. If someone has it we can work something out. Id be generous and make it worth their while, but I would definately need to confirm it first.

2. Not a lot to be honest with you. Fight films are worth a lot to collectors but dont actually go for a lot on the market. I would also tie how expensive something was to how long the film was. For instance Ive seen 30 seconds of rare film go for a thousand or two (this is the original film mind you) but Ive also seen 10 complete rounds of rare film go for a thousand or two. Usually though this stuff is worked out in trade etc. When its not, its because someone has a boxing film that belonged to their grandpa and wants to get rid of it and make a little money. Those people are usually happy to get what they can for it which usually doesnt go much beyond a couple thousand dollars even for very rare stuff (and usually its in the hundreds). And remember, thats for the actual original films.

 

Like I said, your entire argument hinges on one absolute falsification on your part. Take away the idea that I wouldnt have asked you not to let this thing out and its obvious to all that everything you did after that was wrong. Period end of story. As I stated above those people here who know me, or even dont like me, Im sure will find it extremely hard to believe that you just given carte blanche to go ahead start blabbing to the world about it. Especially in light of the fact that we went YEARS without telling ANYONE even our closest friends about it. Come on Clay, thats just ridiculous.

I may use harsh language sometimes, and I may rub people the wrong way sometimes, but this is one case where you are absolutely 100% not being truthful as far as your complicity is concerned and were completely wrong in the way you handled things.

To try to go from point A. Us doing you a favor and being generous, to point B. You bragging to people that you had seen the film and then bringing them to our doorstep that you might get a copy, to point C. That I am somehow wrong for criticising your handling of the situation, is funny.

I mean, if we never had those conversations and, as you want to imply, you were given full reign to go out and tell anyone and everyone about we had in our possession, why would I be irritated now and why would I have been irritated then? Why would our friend have told you to keep those guys off our back? Why wouldnt I have just told Craig "Yeah I have it but I cant trade it"? Why wouldnt I have told my good friend J.J. who is a HUGE Langford fan? I could go on and on here but I dont think anyone is that naive to believe that. None of it adds up.

Im angry for a reason, its been clearly spelled out. Instead you would have people believe I woke up one morning and decided to attack you, someone I had a good relationship with, for no reason and then made up a totally logical and plausible story (most of which you admit to) just for that purpose. You handled that situation poorly. You know it. I know it. Everyone else who was involved knows it. And anyone with half a brain reading these posts can infer it, even with your protestations.

 

klompton, i've often heard that ESPN/Classic has a shitload of films locked away. Have you ever tried to contact them for footage? Are they selling or trading?

 

We could go back and forth on this issue forever and I've got better things to do. It's already been well established where we each stand on this issue, and where you and I stand going forward. It's the end of the story now as far as I'm concerned.

 

Yeah Ive spoken with Steve Lott (the guy who used to curate the collection and was once Tyson's "co-manager) a bunch of times and recently Ive been in touch with the new guy who handles the collection. They have a ton of stuff but the collection effectively stopped growing when Jim Jacobs died in 80s. After that Cayton wasnt very interested in acquiring new films and let a lot of stuff slip through his grasp (It didnt help that he was a jerk and tried to rip off everyone that came through his door trying to sell a fight film). They also dont have most of the pie in the sky **** that some people think they do. The real gems of their collection have for the most part been widely seen now. Its easy to forget that when Cayton and Jacobs it made it big back in the 50s or 60s there werent VCRs etc. Everything was done in film which was expensive. So all of the talk about all this great stuff they had in their collection that no one else had was true, then, but as they would re-air those fights on TV or in documentaries etc. and VCRs came in vogue the stuff they had that no one else had became stuff EVERYONE has. Dont get me wrong. They still have a lot of interesting stuff but not a lot of the stuff that you here mythologized as being in their collection. Here is one list I sent him:

Sonny Liston - Zora Folley 7-18-1960



Sonny Liston - Nino Valdez 8-5-1959



Eddie Machen - Zora Folley 4-9-1958





Jack Dempsey - Fred Fulton 7-27-1918



Jack Johnson - Jim Johnson 12-19-1913

Nino-Benvenuti - Fraser Scott 10-4-1969



Joey Giardello - Henry Hank 7-10-1961



Joey Giardello - Henry Hank 1-30-1962



Jake LaMotta - Robert Villemain 3-25-1949



Archie Moore - Alejandro Lavorante 3-30-1962



Archie Moore - Eddie Cotton 11-5-1957



Willie Pep - Sandy Saddler 10-29-1948



Willie Pep - Sandy Saddler 2-11-1949



Sugar Ray Robinson - Robert Villemain 6-5-1950



Luis Rodriguez - Hurricane Carter 2-13-1965



Luis Rodriguez - Hurricane Carter 8-26-1965



Luis Rodriguez - Bennie Briscoe 12-15-1967



Dick Tiger - Frank Depaula 10-25-1968



Jose Torres - Charlie Green 7-14-1969



Tony Zale - Georgie Abrams 11-28-1941



Harry Greb - Mickey Walker 7-2-1925

Harry Greb - Gene Tunney 5-23-1922



Jerry Quarry - Buster Mathis 3-24-1969



Jerry Quarry - George Johnson 3-19-1970



Ron Lyle - Jimmy Ellis 7-16-1974



Ron Lyle -Oscar Bonavena 3-19-1974



George Chuvalo - Manuel Ramos 9-26-1968



Georges Carpentier - Gunboat Smith 7-16-1914

Can you guess the one fight they had on that list: Chuvalo-Ramos, two round, which everyone else has. They didnt have anything else. Not even Tiger-Depaula which some people will tell you "I know for a fact its in their collection." Most of the really good finds of the last 20 years or so have come from outside of the Cayton/Jacobs/ESPN collection.