Sam Langford Gives His Thoughts On Jack Johnson

Clean up? No, I was the one who found that film in an archive in France before it was ever on the internet nearly 20 years ago. I brought in three other people and together we paid a small fortune to save it and have it transferred before it deteriorated just like the Langford-McVey and Jeanette-McVey fights that I also found which already had. There is no "cleaned up" version that you EVER posted here or anywhere else. You MIGHT have linked a post to the shitty captured version that someone else had already posted, but dont pretend that you even did that first because you didnt. And that certainly isnt anything special. "Gee whiz, look at me, i can copy and post a link!" Of course given that you dont appear much sharper than Dempsey1234 maybe that is impressive to you. After all hes been carrying on a battle of verbal diarhea with my copy and paste skills for days now. Lol. Yeah, your dumbass found, cleaned up, and posted Langford-Jeanette just like youve seen Langford-Hague or any of the other innumerable lies youve been caught posting. The difference between you and I is that I can actually back all of this up with correspondence and wire transfer reciepts from that time. I keep all of that stuff. Like I said, I put my name on what I do and stand behind it.

But hey, for shits a giggles, since you love backing up what you say *rolls eyes* why not post your copy of Langford-Jeanette, you know, the one in pristine quality without a big rooster watermark... No? I didnt think so.

 

Blah blah blah. the fact of the matter is its all in my book, all cited, all in public with my name on it and until you can actually give real examples as to why im supposedly wrong or cherry picking and put your name on them you are nothing but a sad dempsey fanboy hiding behind your heros name on an internet forum. lol. if you or perry care to take up the challenge then by all means do so, my work stands on its own two feet and i stand behind it. until you can actually add anything beyond the same tired bleating like a broken record you two and your comical trolling threads arent worth responding to. the only purpose it serves is to distract from the fact that once again mendoza is being made to look like a fool.

 

Professor what makes you think you are so sharp when you dont discuss any other POV other than yours? Hmmm methinks you be afraid that your POV is not the only one worth discussing and you might be exposed as just a collector of articles and films, that you dont understand.
oh, please open the door again reply to this one.

 

Ah thank you, it's funny you say you dont care but here you are again.



Feb 10, 2013

dempsey1234 said: [url]↑[/url]

Greb never fought them why? The same reason he never fought Dempsey he was too small, a 5'8 MW.

Professor said: Wrong. He agreed to fight Firpo. Firpo didnt. Period. Who did Willard fight? While Dempsey was champion Willard had exactly two fights and FYI Willard said Greb was Dempsey's best challenger. Why would Greb have to fight Fulton? What did Fulton do during Dempsey's reign to show he was somebody? By 1920 he was done. After that point he fought and either lost or drew to five guys Greb had already beaten. Furthermore, Greb isnt a promoter. Greb was given offers and its his job to accept them or refuse them. The only time it was every offered for him to fight Fulton was on a charity card and Greb wouldnt have been paid. Now THAT is a business decision. He stated that he would fight Fulton if he were paid and all of the money was to go to charity so the promoters refused. Period. Thats all in my book too. Can you cite me another instance where Greb refused to fight any of those guys? You cant.

Yes you have said that he ran, but you dont have the intestinal fortitude, to back it up cos it's only your interpretation, and we how much you spin the facts. Who cares what Willard said, the writers you ignore were writing about the possibility of Willard II. Exactly why should Dempsey fight Greb? He didnt need to and your ignoring the fact that the feeling with the public that he was too small. Tunney 5, beat the bejabbers out of Greb, why did he need to fight him again and your claim that he didnt cos he had the Dempsey fight, is just silly. Now here it is and it is in your book your spinning. Fulton didnt need to fight Greb just as Greb didnt need to fight Fulton. If the promoter nixed the idea, that was his "business decision" cos he didnt see it as a major fight where he could make money and pay the fighters what they wanted, see how simple it is, nobody ducking nobody it's was just business. Greb sounds like a guy who was desperate to make money and it's commendable that he was willing to fight anybody, it sounds like today's "unknown Cubans" who are constantly challenging everybody, but there are no takers. Why did Greb fire Engel's cos he didnt get the big fights and money, there were no takers, just like today.


dempsey1234 said: [url]↑[/url]

The Carp - Greb, fight, yes he was offered very good money, but Carp instead took on Bat Levinsky. That was his choice, he made a business decision, again he was under no obligation to consider Greb at all. Carp made a wise decision cos it led to the first million dollar gate. IMO Greb would have beat Carp and that would have changed history, putting that aside, it didnt seem to affect Carp's popularity at all.

Professor said: You are absolutely incorrect here. Its common position for you so Im sure you are used to it. Tex Rickards huge offer to Carpentier came in 1922, 1920, it was AFTER the Levinsky and AFTER the million dollar gate. Carpentier never made that much money again. It was not a wise decision. In the fight he took instead of Greb he got battered, lost his title, was paid about 1/5 what Rickard offered and had his reputation tarnished with a fight fixing scandal. Only a deluded, ill informed fanboy would somehow twist that into a wise business decision. Carpentier was made other offers prior to Levinsky to face Greb and he did decline those offers but Levinsky was not yet on tap at that point so he would have had to have been clairvoyant to avoid Greb in favor of Levinsky. Carpentier had numerous opportunities to test his mettle against Greb and refused.

Ok, that was Carp's decision, and he was entitled to it there was no obligation on his part to take Greb, nobody was claiming it was wise decision. These "unknown Cubans of today are in the same boat, cos nobody wants to fight them and for the same reason they didnt fight Greb. Nobody today is crying that these Cubans should get a shot and that everybody is ducking them. Carp had something Greb didnt have, charisma and that counts for alot, a fact you have no clue on. Carp was marketable and I guess the powers that be at the time agreed over Greb. It's business you may not agree or like but those are the facts. I believe if Greb was as marketable as Carp he would have gotten the shot.

dempsey1234 said: [url]↑[/url]

Dempsey went on to do a few more million dollar gates, so it never affected his popularity that he supposedly "ducked" Greb. The fan's who paid, voted by buying tickets to Dempsey's fights.And 90+ yrs later, Dempsey is revered while Greb is mostly unknown to the average fan,

Professor said: Dempsey certainly wins the popularity contest today but even he would admit that he was not a popular champion per se until after he lost the title. Anyone can tell you that the want to see someone beaten is as powerful or more powerful than the want to just see someone. But none of this detracts from any of my points.

Ali, was booed and people wanted to see him get beat, but after a while, like in Dempsey's case the fan's came to admire him. Dempsey at the time outsold everybody not even close. What other million dollar gate were there in dempsey's time?


dempsey1234 said: [url]↑[/url]

which is a shame cos the guy was a great fighter, and should have been a two division champion, MW & LHW, instead of monkeying around as a HW contender.

Professor said: I dont think Greb, "monkeying around" with heavyweights either hindered his chances at any title shot or hurt his stature, resume, or standing.

If that is the case then why didnt he fight for the LHW title? I didnt say anything about his stature, resume or his standing.

dempsey1234 said: [url]↑[/url]

Why do I have to buy your book if this here is an example of whats in your book, spins and agendas. I would rather look at primary sources who were around at the time and make up my own mind as to what's what and for free.

Professor said: Then I would suggest you do that. You clearly havent.

Clearly I have since you duck any response that is not going along with your version of things you whine that someone should buy your book.

dempsey1234 said: [url]↑[/url]

That should be enough "bleating" for now, I await your response, and apologize to Mc, again for hi-jacking his thread.

Professor said: All of the above was nothing more than your opinion. You came on here with a specific criticism: That I cherry pick my sources and twist the story. I asked for specific examples. You didnt list a single source. You didnt cite a single rebuttal source that I left out of my book. Nothing. In fact you say you havent read my book so until then I will be awaiting an answer to my actual challenge, with specifics. Because here is the thing and weve seen this before: You might go to my book and find something you dont agree with and come back here with an article that supports your contention but the odds are that I cite that article in my book as an alternate view. Youve done that before, posted an article here that you think is some "gotcha" moment and its actually already quoted in my book. So again, show me where I cherry pick my sources with actual real examples and with the citations to refute it, or shut the **** up. Its a simple challenge and despite your broken record post above you still havent taken up the gauntlet.

I have, but since it goes against what you are claiming and cant accept someone else's POV, you ignore it cos you cant answer it with being contradicted, which you cant bear.

 

Professor said: "It doesnt matter if its hard for YOU to believe. It happened. Period. Its detailed on page 484 of my book with sources cited on page 702. The comment "its hard to believe" is not a rebuttal. I asked you for specifics, not vague generalities with nothing to support it. You can either cite your rebuttal or shut the **** up."

First off, you made the statement that Firpo RAN, not me so it's on you that has to back it up, why do I have to? You are a funny guy like always you frame answers and question to suit you. I have done some research and cannot find anything not even a mention of this great fight, so it leads me to believe that it wasnt that big of a deal at the time. That you wont even go into it leads me to believe that is your interpretation of the facts. Why are you so insecure? It's not like it's a major fight covering a whole chapter, if that were so somebody would have at least written something about it. Again why would a big in everything HW, power, size be afraid to face a 5'8 MW that had nothing but speed, and no real pop, to back him up. Just guessing but probably what happened, was that Firpo didnt need to take the fight like the Carp fight. Again, if it was an offer even Firpo, was under no obligation to accept or acknowledge that offer. As always you bend the facts to support your theory. Maybe it's cos someone else can read into it and come up with a different perspective, is that what your afraid of?




Professor said: I did back it up. i gave you everything you need. if you cant read or afford my book or a library card then thats your problem. as i said before, its not my job to educate you.
And once again you post with nothing but opinions. nothing. you made a specific charge that i cherry pick my sources. i asked for SPECIFIC examples and your sources to refute my contention. nothing. nothing but your opinion. so you make these claims but admit you havent read my book, cant produce any specific examples of your allegations, cant produce any sources to back your claim or support it, nothing. until you can actually formulate a serious argument stop wasting everybodys time.

Prof, you have only posted your opinion, and that it's on such and such a page, since I have caught you on commonsense question which are contrary to your you cant accept and understand them. Are you now saying that if went to pg such and such, that there is a primary source headline claiming that Firpo "RAN" from a fight with Greb. Describing how Firpo was scared to fight Greb. You do tend to take things out of context and add your spin to it. I have cked on the freebies and there is not even a slight mention of that fight, I wonder why? I mean you would think that two well known fighters and a fight of this magnitude would be talked about. And please give the respected writers that are on these freebie papers a break.
dont give me this supposition bull**** when you admit you dont even know the first thing about what you are talking about. This horse**** about how this guy or that guy "didnt need" to take the fight is nothing but an excuse by you. firpo didnt NEED to fight homer smith, or weinert, or joe burke, or jack mccauliffe. he didnt need, but he did.

See here you are looking to make a point that nobody needed to fight anybody else, which is true but they did. Something you cant seem to understand is Greb was a MW, and the thinking goes, so you beat a MW, you are supposed to be beat a MW, and if you do it's so what you beat a MW.

Professor said: thats the point, he was fighting less than threatening guys. he didnt have to fight cliff kramer but thats who he offered to face as an alternative to greb. you know how he even knew he kramer was? kramer LOST an 8 rounder on Firpos last undercard. thats who firpo wanted instead of greb. did he NEED to fight cliff kramer?

Since you bring up current examples so will I, Deontay Wilder fought how many cherry picked opponents before and after he won the title? Is he the champ, is he making money? the answer is yes. Just cos Greb traveled the hard road and paid for it by his injuries and scar tissue never mind losing one eye, doesnt mean everybody has to take on everybody. Even the great Joe Louis fought more than his share of turkeys, go down the list, how many murder row blacks did SRR fight?
There are different paths to a title or money. Nobody thinks less of SRR, Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano and all the others.

Apparently Greb wasnt making the money cos he took on guys that he didnt have to, how long did it take Greb to finally win the title? He fired his manager why?

Professor said: You assume i care enough to follow you around your trolling threads. i dont. ive answered your questions in detail.

No you havent, saying it's in my book is not in detail

my book does it for me and my sources are cited. when you put together a rebuttal 1/1000th as well researched as that then we can have a dialogue. until then you can keep creating new threads about me that i ignore and try to hijack threads that im occasionally active on like a child trying to get attention. notice its always you looking for me. i dont give you enough thought to look for you or create threads about you.

Jeez and what do call these responses by you, like I said this really is not intended for you it's intended to give another POV that is contrary to yours and exposing your nit picking ways, your one-sided cherry picking ways. Even if nobody reads these posts I have made that's ok, I love writing them.

 

One of your many problems is your ego is so big, it limits your reading compression skills. The version that went to me was in fact cleaned up by someone else for viewing. Comprende? I never claimed I had a pristine copy. Now, can you see the difference? DUH.

And let's not act like you paid a million bucks for this film. It was from a French media site who didn't care if you obtained it. And the Greb training film was discovered by someone ( a truck driver ) at a SC library. My guess is you wish you found it first and would never share it.

One day I hope a Greb film shows up that has close up view on his face and everyone who sees it agrees it is Greb. And you'd better hope some media site has it because the list of people that don't want you to see it is very long.

Demspey12434 has you at his mercy.

 

One can only speak to what one knows -- seriously doubt Sam had access to the internet to see film or read accounts that we have.

 

But this quote is post-Willard where Johnson was hurt. Surely that was fresh in Langford's memory. My point is this glowing praise is incorrect in quite a few cases, but you do have a point about the times making it harder for Sam to research before speaking.

 

Blah blah blah. the fact of the matter is its all in my book, all cited, all in public with my name on it and until you can actually give real examples as to why im supposedly wrong or cherry picking and put your name on them you are nothing but a sad dempsey fanboy hiding behind your heros name on an internet forum. lol. if you or perry care to take up the challenge then by all means do so, my work stands on its own two feet and i stand behind it. until you can actually add anything beyond the same tired bleating like a broken record you two and your comical trolling threads arent worth responding to. the only purpose it serves is to distract from the fact that once again mendoza is being made to look like a fool.

 

"The version that went to you" that you want to claim credit for posting was already posted here. Period. You didnt post it, you didnt find it, you didnt clean it up, nothing. So stop taking credit for **** you didnt do. But again, that wasnt the point. The point was your insistence that you had a better copy of Johnson-Ketchel than my first generation film transfer. A copy so clear that you could see imaginary bruises and cuts on Johnson's face. That was your contention. Not mine. Now, you also say in the very same argument, that we dont really know because the films are so bad. So in light of that waffling back and forth lets see you post your copy. Since you claim to have set a precedent for yourself of having released some of your ultra rare films then you clearly have no problem posting this film and pointing out the bruises and proving me wrong. Anything less I will take as you conceding that once again you have been caught in a lie. Thats twice today alone.

When did I claim I paid millions for the film? Never. I did pay a lot for that film. Im glad I did. And at the time it was not part of a French media site. It was sitting in a vault on nitrate film deteriorating. You wouldnt know anything about that other than what Ive told you though because even the people I dealt with to get the film dont know how it came about. They simply know how much money they put behind it. So dont pretend you know anything at all about that. Its something Ive done dozens if not hundreds of times: Find and preserve rare boxing films with my own money. What, other than spew lies and hate, have you ever done for this sport? Nothing.

I never claimed to have found the Greb films. Plural, there are more than one, but you wouldnt know that either. Unlike you I wouldnt take credit for the work someone else has done.

Wait, someday you hope a Greb film shows up? You spent weeks arguing until you were blue in the face and ultimately embarrassed, that some clown ass con artist had a copy of a Greb film? I guess youve abandoned that story along the way huh?

The only thing Dempsey has at his mercy is my ability to cut and paste. Hes doing a marvelous job of chasing his own tail.

 

Ah, prof, I just posted a reply to some more of your exaggerations and spins, on my thread about the Greb - Tunney wts. and the 6th fight with Greb haha. Prof I dont care if you read it or not, other people will and that's good enough for me.

 

Yes, chasing my tail, no kind sir I am chasing your running tail. But again Prof you miss the point, it's not for you, it's to expose your exaggeration and spins. I do seem to be on your mind, I am honored.

 

Mc a Freudian slip perhaps? I believe the post was addressed to your good friend Mendoza.

 

He accomplished his purpose: Steer the conversation away from once again getting caught in a lie. The redirect, the only hope of a liar. A sad little man popped his head up once again at Johnson's name, got slapped down, tried to lie once again to bolster his argument, got called on it, and changed the subject. LOL. Its comical.