At middleweight he would do well not sure if he would beat Monzon I doubt it. At Light heavy this was his best weight I feel he could have a long reign here I think he is much more durable then Foster and would probably knock Foster out in one of the mid round like 8. At heavy he would not have as much success to small and the quality is to high don't see him beating Frazier, Ali or Foreman be interesting to him vs Norton, Quarry, Young and Lyle feel he could trade some wins and loses with them.
Assuming he turns pro in 1970 he'll be ready for Monzon in '75. If he wins, keep him at middle until he has a nice easy title challenge at 175 - say when Foster vacates. He can boss that division until such a time as an easy division is weak enough that he can dominate without problems. Say John Tate. He can fight until he is beaten, possibly not until Tyson, retire with one defeat the greatest fighter that ever lived. Hooray! And hooray for me too, i'm one great manager. Maybe i'll try and muscle in on this Tyson boy, keep himout of trouble...
That's the one. That's the moment. Every fighter has one. Be some fight. If he loses that one and the rematch (and there would be one) you'd have to move him straight up to 175 and rebuild.
With very little film available, its difficult to draw an accurate assessment of how someone like Langford would do in any era outside of his own. For what its worth, he defeated many of the more highly thought of fighters of his period. He also makes a lot of people's all time great list despite never becoming a world champion. With little footage available, and very little historical knowledge of the man myself, I can say that I would have my doubts about him really making a mark as a heavyweight in the 70's. Here are my reasons: 1. He fought under very different rules,and there's no way of telling what he would have become if he was born in say 1950. 2. He was obviously very talented, but would have been rather small in size for a heavyweight of the 1970's. It also takes a bit away from reality to make assumptions about how he might have bulked up and weather or not he would have been better because of it. 3. While certainly being a super acheiver, he also had a mixed bag of results against fighters who's credentials were not particularly impressive ( of course I've never seen these guys fight either ).
And what shows you that he would run through monzon? Punch power doesnt mean you can run through any fighter,otherwise tommy hearns would have licked leonard inside two rounds...
You have recently told me that pound for pound means (would loose to the best heavyweight). Sam Langford knocked out all the best heavyweights so by your logic he would beat Monzon.
Not really. Tunney beat all his heavyweight opponents yet lost to a lt heavy in greb.......Go figure...... Toney beat a few world class heavies yet lost easily to jones at middle and griffin at lt heavy. Etc,etc..... (fitzimmons beat heavies,yet still lost to lt heavies and middles,no?)