Fitzsimmons vs Langford: 165 pounds

Two of the fighters that just leave me in awe. I can't decide on this one. Fitz was not only ****** strong with power completely disassociated from his size, he was cagey and smart, setting up his big punch with extreme cleverness. Langford was just pretty much the greatest fighting machine ever made. The question is whether Fitz could pull his trump card before Langford's well rounded game played out. I still can not decide on this one.

 

Nor me! A coin toss is all I can come up with.

 

Some great posts in here. I wonder if anybody has every read what Langford thought about Fitz and the other way round?

 

langford is the bigger, better fighter. from the little footage we have of both fighters, i'm not terribly impressed with fitz but i am with langford.

 

Hell,Surf:
I recall- "Remember The Maine "...:scaredas:

 

What is already well known is that Sam considered Joe Gans the greatest of all time, and that Fitz himself was The Old Master's hero and idol in boxing. Based upon that alone, I'd imagine Langford and Fitz would have thought highly of each other. (Fitz did mutually admire Joe greatly, saying "Gans is the cleverest fighter, big or little that ever put on the gloves" and that he was the marvel of the age.)

 

When I first visited Arlington National Cemetery, the two things I recall most vividly were the grave of Audie Murphy (who had just been killed in a plane crash), and the USS Maine Mast Memorial. Years later, working in a hospital, I met one of the final 1000 surviving US veterans of the Spanish-American War, somebody who actually participated in the "Charge up San Juan Hill." He didn't mince words. "First of all, we didn't charge up, we walked up. Second, it was foolish and stupid, like all wars."

 

First lets put this into perspective.

These two fighters were undoubtedly the two most formidable finishers of the period between John L Sullivan and Jack Dempsey, despite their size.

Believe it.

I have given a lot of thought to this match up, and would not care to have any money down on it, but I throw my vote in with Langford. My reason for this pick is that Bob Fitzsimmons tended to work within verry narrow margins of safety when avoiding punches. He never made an oponent miss by two inches if he could make them miss by one. I think that Langford, who was verry versatile in setting up traps from unexpected angles, would probably find a way to turn this strategy on him and lead him into trouble.

The beuty is that we will never know.

 

‘Boxing’ magazine. Vol. 1, No. 5 - October 9, 1909
The Terrible Sam Langford
“Despite Bob Fitzsimmons’s opinion of Sam Langford, it appears that the majority of American boxers, both white and colored, are still desperately afraid of him. Joe Jeannette demands prohibitive terms, so that match is off - and yet Jeannette used to speak so contemptuously of him. Stanley Ketchell has taken a tremendous stride out of the way, preferring to take on Jack Johnson. It probably does look as though the redoubtable Sam is the real champion of the world in fact as well as in name.”

Bob Fitzsimmons on Iron Hague, Jeffries, Langford and Himself
“Asked his what he thought about Iron Hague, Bob was scarcely complementary. “I could lick him inside two rounds,” he said. “How do I know? Why, I had the gloves on with him in Sheffield, and he was right down scared of me. I don’t know why, but he was. He made a fuss about fighting me, but as I told him, ‘That will be all right. It only wants one man to make a show. You come right on at me and hit me out as hard and as often as you like. Leave it to me to look after myself and make things interesting.’ This cheered him up some, but he was still a bit nervous. He wanted to use the gloves he had work with Moir, when he did come on the stage, I couldn’t get him to come to me. I had to carry the fight to him, and then he wanted to keep clear. He wouldn’t fight, in fact, and skipped about quite a lot. He was in no sort of condition for this, though, and he soon got puffing and blowing in such a way that I had to hold him up, and to call out to the timekeeper to call time.’

Still, he has all the makings of a champion in him. He is just the right build, if, perhaps a little too fleshy. He has a big punch of his own, and can take one, too. If I only had him in hand for a few months, and he would train as I should want him, he would make the very best man in the world sit up and take notice.

Sam Langford’
“Asked for his views on the World’s Championship, Fitz declined to commit himself definitely. On the subject of Sam Langford’s claims, however, he was very plain spoken. Langford, according to Fitzsimmons, is far too slow ever to be a world beater. He saw his fight with Hague, and considers that the Yorkshireman would have won had he only been in proper condition. The black is, in his opinion, a vastly overrated man, and would never be able to extend Johnson. As for Johnson, he considers that his career will be finished when he meets Jem Jeffries. “I think,” says Bob, “that Jeff will beat Johnson to death. Remember that I have met them both, and so ought to know all about their respective chances. Jeffries is in a class by himself. He is a mountain of a man. Johnson will never be able to hurt him enough to win, and the **** will never be able to stand Jem’s punches. I know all about them, remember, because I have felt them.”

 

Cheers for that Clay.

Interesting stuff. Fitzsimmons does seem to be really biased towards black fighters there.

 

On the other hand he had a very high opinion of the old master. I guess he really thinks what he says there.

 

Fitz thought the world of Peter Jackson, and Joe Gans. Langford on film had a low guard, and was not dynamic with his feet. But I would not call Sam slow. He had decent hand speed.

 

To compare Bob fitzimmons and Sam Langford H2h in their primes is difficult for todays casual posters.Today they see 2 films of Bob Fitz.
In 1897 with James J Corbett, when Fitz was34 years old. Ko by Fitz.
In 1909 when 46 year old Fitz [an old shell]with Bill Lang...
They, todays casual observer, think of this Bob Fitz, when evaluating him.
DEAD WRONG, I believe ! Like seeing Ali vs Holmes in 1981 when Ali was 39
years old...They were both shells of themselves...
Unfortunatly therare no films of the prime Bob Fitzimmons koing the
great Non.Jack Dempsey in 1891, when Fitz was 28 years old.
No fims of Fitz flattening Peter maher in 1rd in 1896,at age 33.
No film of old Fitz flattening the tanklike Tom Sharkey in 2 rds in 1900
no film of Fitz at 165 lbs koing Gus Ruhlin in 1900.
this is the Bob Fitzimmons,i envision in a H2H fight same weight with the 165 lb Sam Langford...We must bear in mind that Sam Langford would be
20 years younger than Fitz..
both great fighters but H2H @ 165 pounds, Fitz would have been too much in size,and would have been a big betting favorite over Langford,
both at their absolute primes...

 

well J, We I can only use conjecture what style advantage Fitz had over
Langford,both at 165 pounds..I visualize Fitz at about 6ft.tall,though only
165 pounds,being a larger man from the waist up. Advantage Fitzimmons.
i base my opinion on several opinions by experts of that time.
1-Edgar Lee Masters poet and boxing observer who saw every hewavyweight champion ringside from Bob fitzimmons to Joe Louis.In a great article,before his death in 1950 Masters was convinced that Bob Fitzimmons was the greatest heavyweight he ever saw ringside. A very
convincing article for me...
2-Sandy Ferguson,old time heavyweight who was in the ring with both men, picked Bob Fitz to win were fitz and langford to have fought each other.
3- in all the old Ring Mags from the late 1920s, most all boxing writers who were still alive and saw Fitz and always placed Ruby Robert @ 165 lbs. in the top 5 heavyweights of alltime, while Langford was seldom if ever
considered among the top 5 heavyweights..He was alkways regarded as boxings best uncrowned champion...Both are immortals in my eyes...
REMEMBER, we are comparing them at 165 pounds...Fitz takes it....