Sam Langford The Best Fighter Of All Time?

1/3 of Sam's career was spent fighting the same 7 guys, good as they were. That makes it a bit easier to get the name on the win list. He beat an excellent caliber of fighter overall- my post wasn't meant to come off as combative or disrespectful, it's simply my opinion. In general, I still feel the black heavyweight contenders of that era get too much benefit of the doubt because of the circumstances that were against them that kept them from having more defining fights- and giving historical goodwill to their quality is certainly understandable because it wasn't fair to the sport or the men that we didn't get to see the best vs the best.

But it does hurt that we never got to see Sam try to avenge his sound defeat vs Jack Johnson, who was on another level as far as heavyweight quality went as compared to all other contenders, black or white. Sam often gets called the "uncrowned heavyweight champion", but I don't think he'd ever have beaten Johnson. He was the best of the rest of the black contenders of the day, but that's no indicator he'd have won the title. He couldn't beat Fred Fulton in 2 tries. So essentially, he was a top contender of his day. If Greb were to campaign at heavyweight, could you say you wouldn't have favored him to become a top contender, as Langford did? I don't believe it's a stretch at all when you consider Greb beat multiple men who received heavyweight title shots.

Still, that's a hypothetical on my part- the fact is Sam beat the better heavyweights. However, Greb still defeated heavyweights along with the better middleweights and light heavyweights- guys like Gibbons, Loughran, Walker, Chip, Norfolk, Tunney, Dillon and Levinsky, and with only one good eye for a substantial portion of it. Sam fought a future Heavyweight champ. He lost. So did Greb- Greb didn't. Had Sam stayed at middleweight, it's no guarantee he'd have blown through the fighters that Greb did by any means. Possible, but heavyweight success doesn't guarantee lower weight greatness if he'd campaigned there longer and gotten the best fights.

Although I'm sure a rabid dissection of this post will probably occur in the next minute or so, this breakdown isn't to discredit Sam, who certainly is an ATG. It's splitting hairs between two legendary fighters, of whom I prefer Greb's work. I certainly wouldn't begrudge anyone who prefers Langford, whose a one-of-a-kind fighter. Let's put it this way- if they had full career sets for them, I'd own both fighters'. All 600 of 'em. :good

 

It is hard to compare them in terms of size but I think that Langford would have been unable to make 160lbs at an earlier stage of his career than Greb.

 

Even if you only took into acount one win for every fighter Langford beat he would still be competitive with Greb in terms of depth.

 

That means he was a phenomenal fighter, not that he was better physically equipped to deal with larger men. Yes, his style was puzzling to them, but he lacked the physical stature, strength, and power of Langford. My point is, Langford was much more naturally suited to HW, at least during that era. Greb got by on his ability rather than the combination of ability and physical stature, as Langford did.

No, I'm simply saying Langford was the bigger, stronger, more powerful man, one that routinely weighed in from 180-200 pounds, which was more than suitable for the HW division of the day. Greb on the other hand fought there weighing little over 165.

Their most successful divisions, arguably. But that doesn't disprove the fact that Langford was indeed the bigger fighter and would therefore be better suited to fighting at a heavier weight.

Certainly not.

How do you know? I listed out neither of their resumes.

You can't judge a fighter's worth (or anything, really) strictly on facts. You know this as well as I.

 

Have you joined this site after reading 'Eastside Boxing: For Dummies'. You post like a child.

 

You get owned by everyone:deal

As is the benchmark, Asero would own you.

 

I'll respectfully disagree with you since I did that and still prefer Greb's work.

There's no one way to measure a resume, but for my money:
Tunney, Walker, Flowers, Chip, Levinsky, Mctigue, Dillon, Gibbons (both of them), Loughran, Miske, Rosenbloom, and Slattery, among other contenders, is a bit better overall than Langford's.

At this level, it's not about disliking one man's work because each has a hell of a case for them- it boils down to who I prefer, and in this case, it's Greb.

 

langford is probably the #1 p4p.
fighting the same fighters many times is good IF they are elite fighters.
he was avoided.
as a HW i don't give him a realistic chance in modern times simply because he was far from (being a legitimate) HW.
had he not gotten fat he could have made 160 forever , but he had no reason to maintain this weight because no one wanted him at 160 after he proved himself there so he got higher for no other options.
true that it is hard to find videos of full fights of him.
based on record he is probably p4p #1.
his record (including the weights and tale of the tape thing) is much more impressing than SRR.
SRR a 5'11" who dominated the 147 and later the 160 with a few setbacks.
langford a 5'6" maybe 5'7" who was a terror at any weight maybe except HW. and langford initial weight was about SRR's.
that's p4p.

 

This was a young, pre-prime Langford who lost handily. We're talking about the version who generally fought as a HW. That version didn't surface for a while after the Johnson bout. Let's try to stay relevant.

Langford was the bigger man with the better record at HW. I am not denying that. Greb has the superior record at MW and LHW, and his record at those weights is more stacked than Langford's entire career of work, even if you disagree that it involves a higher quality of opposition. I didn't state as much, either.

You said he was a better fighter. I disagree. Let's not get into semantics, because you know what I mean and I know exactly where you're going with this. I'd rather not go around in another circle. In case you haven't noticed we're not even finished with that debate yet, so why start it up again half-way through?

It's obvious we simply have differing views on Langford and Greb's natural size and/or the difference that makes in regards to their opposition. You seem to think their physical qualities are hardly an issue and therefore everything they accomplish should be completely relative. I disagree. Greb was the smaller man with the better record against men his size and an excellent one against larger men. Langford, being the larger man, naturally had the better record against larger opponents. Greb fought at HW more as a means to test himself than anything, Langford fought there because he was a HW by that point in his career. That's not taking away from his ability, those are just the facts.

Why don't you list them out, then? For both men.

I think that was taken out of context. I speak very bluntly sometimes, you know that. I simply stated that Greb had the better resume due to it's far greater depth. But again, it depends on what you prefer. Quality or quantity. I tend to think Greb's unquestionable edge in quantity outweighs Langford's arguableedge in quality.

 

When somone is put up there as P4P, I ask what he does best P4P than anyone else?

Speed?
Defense?
Jab?
Punching Technique?
Stamina/Workrate?
P4P Power?

I think Langford is lacking in a few of those areas, he was great for his time with an amazing legacy but skills developed to another level after his retirement. I'm sure he'd be a vastly improved fighter in the 40s/50s and onwards

 

He may have had success across more weight classes than Greb and others, but he wasn't necessarily more proven or accomplished in any one of them. He moved through divisions relatively quickly until he reached HW, and he only came away with draws against the top guys at both WW (Walcott) and MW (Ketchel). He didn't clean out or dominate a division the way Greb, Armstrong, Robinson, or others have done. Moreover, Gans and Ketchel (and possibly Walcott as well) were coming up in weight to fight him, so he also wasn't fighting those guys at the weight classes in which they were rated as the best.