If there was no color line, who would be champ 1910-1937?

Without being injured by an Iron Rod, Willard would have been dominant up into his 50's. He'd knock joe louis the **** out.

 

Assuming the champion does not DUCK his best contenders, I'll pick what I see as the best man.

1910 - Johnson
1911-1914 Langford was 28 years old in 1911
1915-1917 Willard
1918-1923 Dempsey
1924-1928 Tunney
1929-1932 Schmeling

The rest as history has it

 

I see two interesting counterfactuals here:

I actually think that Sam Langford might have had a shot at beating Johnson after the Jeffries fight, and that if he had he wouldn’t have held the title for long. If he does then the ramifications are enormous, but if he doesn’t, then we know that Willard will do it eventually.

There has been a lot of debate about whether Wills could have beaten Dempsey, but nobody bothers to ask whether he could have beaten Willard? With no colour line, I suspect that Wills would have established himself as the leading contender earlier, possibly by taking out Fulton earlier. This would have set him up for a fight with Willard, where he would have been seen as the underdog, and I suspect that he would have prevailed over the inactive champion.

Then we would be lamenting the shameful way that he ducked Jack Dempsey.

From Dempsey onwards, I suspect it makes little difference. The one wild card is George Godfrey, who might just turn out to be the monster that his contemporaries thought he was.

 

I'm as big a Langford fan as there is but do you really think Sam would take Jack? You would favor him to do this?

 

Possibly yes!

Johnson rally went into the tank after Reno.

He was institutionalised at one point, because of his guilt after the race riots.

If Langford brings his A game here, he has a good chance.

 

Clay Moyle probably knows more about Sam Langford than any one ,he picks Johnson to beat him.
On Boxing Day 1911 Langford weighed 170lbs for a fight with Sam McVey which he lost.
I don't believe he could concede 40 lbs to Johnson and win. His only chance to defeat Johnson is if Jack comes into the ring out of shape ,knowing Langford ,Johnson would not do this.
A fit, well conditioned Johnson is too much fighter for Langford who had his own weight and conditioning issues for example in1911 he fought at 160 lbs and also 180lbs.

Short, come forward fighters did not do well against Johnson. Wills might have beaten Willard if he could have got him in1918.
Tunney would not have beaten an active Dempsey in1924. Carnera and Braddock would never have been champ .

 

I've never seen this offered as the reason for Johnson's problems source please? If Johnson brings his A game, Langford is in for a long and painful evening.

 

Langford has a chance against any fighter but I would not FAVOR him over Johnson.

 

Wills is so overrated, he lost to any good heavyweight he fought aside from Firpo, who was in semi-reiteremnt. Sharkey and Uzcudum both beat Wills easy, yet people still want to put down Jack Dempsey by saying he ducked Wills

 

Without the colour line, Johnson wouldnt have had to semi retire after Jefffries, like he did. He also wouldnt have been trying to line up the easy white fights, meaning that while Langford, McVey and Jeanette get their shots nice and early in Johnson's reigns, johnson is still in the same form and shape, meaning it is unlikely that he doesnt repeat the thrashings he already gave all three.

It is also hard to imagine Johnson Willard being a long fight in the cuban sun, and the scary part is that it took Johnson another decade to lose another fight. How would he have been if had stayed in shape and kept fighting without being completely excluded from rematches? Possibly Jack would be seen as the greatest ever by a long shot.

 

You have to be kidding.

 

For me it's a bit like when Ward basically semi retired and Froch was the best active SMW, but we would all back Ward in a heartbeat to beat him again.

Johnson was semi retired and Langford was the best of the active men, but Johnson would have likely beaten him black and blue.

 

Yes. Langford by 1911 was a far cry from the 156 pounds 20-year-old Johnson could not stop but defeated on points. And he tried!

Sam hit very hard, was extremely strong in the clinches, and had greatly increased in weight and muscle mass since the 1906 meeting. Films show Langford was an accurate hitter with knock out power.

Johnson struggled in title matches vs. lesser men.

1909: Johnson drew with a much smaller O'Brien, was TKO'd in an exhibition match vs Smith and was floored by a blown up middle in Ketchel. Very shaky stuff for a new champion.

After beating an inactive and washed up Jeffries in 1910, Johnson took a year off, then had DQ win over Flynn a dubious draw vs Jim Battling Johnson. A year after that, Johnson was barely the better vs Frank Moran according to the surviving film.

Speaking of Battling Jim, he can be seen fighting Sam McVey, and their lacks of skills is alarming.

The last time Johnson faced a man near his size with some power prior to this was vs Marvin Hart, and Johnson lost that one

Langford was in his prime by 1911, and several notches above those Johnson gave title shots too. I think he knocks Johnson out or pounds his way to a decision.

 

Langford was 180 in 1911 vs Jack O'Brien ( KO 5 ), Johnson drew with the same man, and 178 vs. Jeannette in 1911.

I tend to doubt Langford is 170 vs Johnson in 1911. 180 is more like it, and Johnson's best wins came when he was under 200 pounds.

Maybe Sam is giving up 25 pounds, not 40 as you mentioned.

Power has a way of making weight less relevant and that's Langford's advantage. He was far more active than Johnson, harder to knock out, and had longer arms. Sam was pretty smart in the ring, and had good accuracy. There's a reason why Johnson avoided him as champion.