Rank these Legends H2H: Sullivan. Corbett. Fitz. Langford. Greb.

I'd Have
Langford
Greb
Sullivan/Fitz
Then Corbett.

I don't think Greb Would hurt Langford and Langford had a real chance to hurt Greb.

I tend to think Fitz may be better but He avoided many of the big hitters he could have faced (slavin, goddard, jackson) and At least one Aussie fighter thought Goddard & Slavin would dispose of him Fitz rather easy. Which is a real possibility and always in the back of my mind. Goddard might have cut Fitz down rather quickly given the chance.
A prime in shape Sullivan might really beat him up.

I have Corbett around Denver Ed Martin, Hank Griffin & George Godfrey level. Corbett seemed to have no ability to fight inside. I think he would of been exposed with a proper fighter John L Sullivan would of been custom made to beat him ironically. Sully did win some rounds. But Sharkey was the guy whom exposed him. They called Corbett a "parlor" fighter in the newspapers. We can only guess what they were trying to infer but a rough house nature wasn't his calling.

Generally Langford is better than we remember if your talking him at his best than he's a beast...He fought so much he had some up & down performances. A argument for or against can be made because of his unevenness.
But if it was big money fight & he had time to prepare he would likely be as fearsome as any old school fighter that lived and would certainly be able to get Greb going in reverse. Langford was better than Norfolk or Tiger Flowers and they caused him some real trouble. Even at an advanced age & faded Langford delivered the goods & beat a prime Kid Norfolk.

However good you think Langford is I would say double that and your probably a bit closer. His resume is actually better than Greb's.

Langford likely would have beat Dempsey around the Norfolk timeline of 1917. Norfolk was something very special. He was one of a handful of fighters who could flip the switch & just put a guy out after carrying them whenever he wanted and he got the nod from his corner and a faded Langford was still too much for him.

Like I say take however good you think Langford was & double it.

P.S. I share the same OPTION about Langford as Random Acoustic Thoughts. A shoutout to a great channel on Youtube.

 

Greb was an outstanding fighter the shorter the distance the more it would favor him vs Langford. In a 15 or 20 round bout. I would guess Langford would win but with most of the great's matched up they would split series to some effect. 60-40 or something.

I certainly believed at one point Greb could beat Dempsey. Conventional points towards Dempsey
But if Tommy Gibbons could go the distance then Greb could also.

I am of the belief that Norfolk could beat Dempsey in 1917-18 range
Greb had some issues with Norfolk who was right there in talent
So the thought of Greb besting Dempsey isn't that far fetched.
The evidence supports this...theory.
Tommy Gibbons, Tunney & Greb & Billy Miske were all close in talent as was Kid Norfolk.
Dempsey was slightly more on the next level of Gibbons & Miske mostly due to body size/power as opposed to dramatic skill level.

It might play out just like Greb vs Tunney. Greb taking dempsey in first fight, losing the others after he got a bead on him.

So the argument to make would be just how better was Greb than miske & Gibbons and is the gap big enough he would give Dempsey a bigger challenge than they did which the answer likely is yes...But Greb didn't have more power than Gibbons or miske, he had more skill though.

But Langford couldn't really be hurt and he had sledgehammmer power it's just a level above miske, gibbons & norfolk & Greb.

When Fitz were to fight Goddard or Slavin before he would leave for USA. He would of likely been steamrolled. There's a good chance they sparred.
He developed after he came here a bit more. But even with that development that doesn't mean he would be pushing around much much bigger men than he was...

All the folks in Aussie land were stunned he was as big of a star as he was. Goddard might have been an even bigger star had he actually got a chance to fight John L Sullivan.
Those that don't know he (goddard) met Sullivan in his hotel room & waved thousand of dollars in his face...but John L was already rich & didn't want to break his contract in acting and said such to Goddard. Who left dejected.
I think Goddard wins that match vs Sullivan
But opportunity often plays a large factor in a fighter's success...
Goddard would be viewed as huge star had he been successful.
It's no given at all that Fitz could beat a prime Joe Goddard
just the same as Greb Beating a prime Dempsey
They are at a huge disadvantage no matter their skill
Goddard was just as powerful as Dempsey was in his day and far far more ruthless
they allowed all kinds of stuff to fly back then..
Goddard would of likely tried throwing Fitz right out the ring onto his head and expected him to continue.

My thought's aren't any kind of fact. But there is a case to be made that many of the ATG had their own kind of smoking mirror shows.
Maybe Fitz really wasn't that spectacular
maybe Corbett was made to appear far better than he was.. by carefully chosen fights
maybe Dempsey was a sloppy boxer who never fully developed
Maybe Jack Johnson as champion would of lost to a couple fighters not just one (mcvey, langford, wills)
Maybe if Fitz & corbett weren't that spectacular than perhaps Jeffries was more vulnerable than people think.

I think as a historian you better at least be open to these possibility's and not just assume things.
Boxing history is rich with folks betting thinking they had everything figured out only to go flat broke with the complete opposite thing happening. As a historian you better be fully aware of this or your doing yourself a disservice.

Just Fitz as an example of an all time P4P I'd have him ahead of some boxers that came past him in Marvin Hart & Tommy Burns. But I don't think Fitz was as good as Tommy Gibbons or Kid Norfolk or a Lightheavy Tunney and certainly not Greb or even a Jack Dillion.
There's a big difference from a Dan creedon to a Jack Dillion. Fitz era didn't have enough pure boxers to just out tactician him. Greb's era was loaded with real "no doubt" skill.
It had it in abundance.

it's such a shame that Stanley Ketchel never got a chance to take on say a Jack Dillion.
What a match that would of been.