Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by robert ungurean, Jul 28, 2018.
I bet he didn't see anything rare, but for some reason he dislike Langford so he decided to say so.
Langford was extremely slow in his moves and punches, compared to most (or many) current fighters, even in Heavyweight.
He swung even wider his haymaker than Sapp did, if you watch this video here, but who punches more fluid and later learnt accurate techniques, he possible had even a proper jab (as he could do low kicks very well too) a round the end of his career, in opposite to Langford.
I have seen a sparring of at most 4 minutes from the original Boxing Banter (perhaps published by Welsh Devil via Megaupload). It was likely against an inferior boxer, maybesome clubboxer.
You have to be kidding here. In a world where Adam Kownacki is one of the best HWs you talk about Langford being slow? Don't be ridiculous, I see nothing slow in Langford. The way he destroyed Lang showed that he had quick hands and he could use legs well to set up the punches.
Langford floored Lang with perfect short hook. He dominated Jeanette with short, fast punches from outside. He threw a few long uppercuts against Flynn but that's because Flynn forced inside fight. I don't remember him throwing wide haymakers in any of his fights, could you show me any example?
Not to mention that Langford used jab and used it well. I don't get where have you found that Langford didn't have jab, there are plenty of examples on the tape.
How about judging fighters by their fights? Not meaningless sparings? Langford looks nothing like you describe him, maybe you don't talk about the same fighter?
Which Lang you are speaking about? It was certainly not Clubber, but somone much worse (even less skillful), a clubboxer.
And Kownacki might be now around top 20, but is still far away from the first 10 in my opinion.
Have you the fights against Jeannette n video and watched these?
Langford was for current measures very ordinary and had absolute no defence. It was like cave-man or stone age boxing, if is could be called so, rather were it street brawls, were they stopped almost every punch with their heads and never kept the gloves in front of the face of body, to prevent to get hit.
Yes, I have.
I see, you are just a troll. Langford used even crossarm defense against Jeanette, but you say he stopped punches with his head? You don't know what are you talking about.
Here is short clips showing Langford boxing in "modern way":
This content is protected
He slipped a jab, then parried another and came with his own. Nothing spectacular, but he showed good defense and instinct.
But yeah, people 100 years ago couldn't understand what a guard is.
So Sam Langford was inferior to Bob Sapp as a boxer.Okay, thanks for putting us right on that.
In term osf defensive skills, like guard by keeping your hands up, but arguable even in footwork and straight punches (jabs). Even his hooks seemed come not from so far behin as Langfords, who swinged them wider and mostly haymakers. Perhaps can he be compared with Catalin Morusanu (The Carpadian Death).
To be honest, this clip appears like wrestling or some other sports on the canvas (judo, mixed martial arts or jui-jitsu), as it appears he try a take down, to put his opponent to the bottom.
Smaller gloves gives you more ways to beat your opponent. If you don't see Langford boxing here, the I can't help you.
I even shown you example of Langford doing something boxers does all the time today, but you just ejected it.
Again, you watch different fights than all people here if you think that Sapp is better boxer than Langford.
BTW, high guard with small gloves is far from the best way to protect himself. If you really think that people 100 years ago were too stupid to put his hands high to defend himself from punches, then I have to worry you, because there is something else that acts like a stupid person...
Where did you read this out of interest?
Because I have never claimed such permission.
I only maintained he did few single techniques better, but not that he was overall a superior boxer, as I pointed before. Both were not the most skillful operators.
This forum taught me that Wille Driver and Bob Sapp were better boxers than Sam Langford. Amazing...
Sam Langford is arguably the GOAT. The footage we have shows very strong and patient fighter with great punching technique, ability to cut off the ring and simple, subtle defensive moves and good footwork to set up powerful punches. All of these while facing bigger fighters. But yeah, he's worse than Sapp.
Well not just his résumé. His ability to KO top level HWs has to be up there. That and the fact he went up about 40lbs whilst having success and the fact he often have up 40lbs anyway.
Well maybe is it an intelectual problem of yourself, if you are not able to read accurate or willing to do so. But this is not my problem. What it is, that you put words into my mouth I never used and just wrote the opposite in what you quoted, this is very hypocrite and cowardly of you.
But have you ever seen Langford throwing a jab? It is amazing that one of the best (if not the greatest in the Universe, as you name him god), didn't do this basic punch, but yeah he had an outstanding punching technique (rather clubbing)...
And though a guard is not the only defensive technique, but a very simple one and effective (most often); even Jones used it not so rarely.
hahaha a sentence i never thought i'd read!