Is there no film whatsoever of Harry Greb in an actual fight?

..

 

The only reason you have a shitty youtube copy of langford jeanette with a big chicken watermark is because i found that film and paid to have it transferred. you know, a pristine copy with no big watermark... something i assure you you will never see.

as for the weights you are either stupid or illiterate. langford was 14 pounds heavier in new york than when he whipped jeanettes ass in paris and if you have all the paris accounts as you pretend then youll know that even 14 pounds lighter than the 199 1/2 he weighed in new york was still considered slightly soft by onlookers. but hey, lets not shatter your little jeanette wet dream.

 

..

 

..

 

Langfrod scaled 199.5lbs for the October13th 1913 fight with Jeannette and was described as hog fat
He scaled 185.75lbs for the Paris fight, 13.75lbs lighter.

I dont understand all the cursing and name calling on your part,whatever your issues with Klompton those are the facts .

 

..

 

This is why nobody takes you seriously. I point out that you are wrong on several points factually and you react like a ****ing child. Take Jeanettes flacid **** out of your mouth long enough to realize that while you are trying to hurt my feelings by saying there is Jeanette footage that the ONLY reason you have ANY access to that footage is because of me. Whether you choose to believe that or not is irrelevent. It doesnt matter if you are a member of Gaumonts site. The only reason that film, and many more boxing films are on that site, is because I found them and paid to have them transferred from 35mm nitrate to digital format nearly 15 years ago. They werent even on the internet before the guy you want to insult found them. So I salvaged the only actual fight footage of your hero. What have you done to contribute to his history besides rewriting it with your purile childish bull****?

Oh, and guess what, since then Ive found another Jeanette fight, one which predates this one by four years. What do you think the odds are that you will ever see that one?

Take a look at this photo which compares your version of the film and mine and tell me if Im full of ****? Then go look up the weights for the October 3 1913 Langford Jeanette fight Vs. the December 1913 Langford Jeanette fight and tell me you arent full of **** by claiming Langford weighed the same for both fights. ****ing ******.

[url]http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z335/klompton/vlcsnap-2014-07-30-16h26m11s120_zps85720145.png[/url]

New York Press October 4, 1913: "Sammy is fat as a prize porker..." "Entering the ring as fat as any cannibal king Sam Langford was unable to show his at his best..." "Official weights were announced as Jeanette 196. Langford 199 1/3..."

New York Herald October 4 1913: "Langford was fat and slow. Much slower than the last time he was seen in action here..." "he weighed 199 1/2 pounds and about twenty five of those pounds were carried at the waistline..."

New York Evening World October 4 1913: "Sam, whose announced weight was 199 1/2 had a round little tummy that made him look as if he had just swallowed a deflated punching bag by mistake with tube attached and then allowed someone to pump it up... ...He was proportioned like a chunky chinese Joss sitting on a cushion and contemplating his sacred fatness."

Brooklyn Daily Eagle October 4, 1913: "Langford was accused of being utterly out of condition."

Brooklyn Standard Union October 4, 1913: "He was hog fat at 199 pounds when he should have scaled in at 180. He moved about like an ice wagon stationed in front of a thirst emporium blockading the way for passengers to get on or off the surface cars. And if you have encountered this situation you know with what rapidity said ice wagon moves."


Do you want to show some evidence that Langford didnt weigh 185 for Jeanette two months later? Or better yet that he weighed 199 pounds?

 

..

 

Nobody attacked you until you got defensive and started cursing at people. Look at my post. I pointed out four factors that disputed what you said. Nothing more. You took offense. Grow a thicker skin. If you are so convinced that Langford weighed 199 then post screenshots of your contemporary french sources. I fail to see how a program would give an accurate weight as programs are printed before the fight, not after. I suggest you post the articles from L'Auto, La Boxe et Les Boxeurs, and Vie Au Grande Air. Those would have the most complete coverage.

 

Really? I dont have access to Gallica just like you? You know, the french archive that posts dozens of newspapers which have Langford's weight as 185. If its not why not shut me up and post your sources. You have no problem scanning and posting photos on your website so do it here.

 

..

 

Shut the **** and post your sources. Put your sources where your mouth is. You cant so you wont. You want to post a bunch of lies that make it look like Jeanette drew in against a prime, in condition Langford. He didnt. They put up a poor ten rounder that was disputed in New York when it counted for nothing. When a version of the title was on the line Langford took it seriously showed up in shape and owned your hero just like he did most other times. Its as simple as that. You trying to rewrite history with lies wont change it. The fact that youll sit here and expend so much energy cursing and whining like a child rather than take five minutes to post your "sources" tells me all I need to know. You have absolutely nothing that backs up your argument. Nothing.

 

..

 

Exactly. Just what I thought. Your opinion, supported by no facts and all your stories about having sources that refute known scholarly research were bull****. Congratulations.

 

..