Sam Langford vs Archie Moore at Lightheavyweight - who would have won?

He also lost in his prime to guys that were around his size. No fighter has zero weaknesses. Not even Langford.

 

Langford could be outboxed by excellent big men with huge reach and size advantages ... by this I mean heavyweight dimensions. Late in his career Langford was bettered by Wills this way and also by Fred Fulton, a Wlad clone of the day ... I have huge respect for Moore and feel he would be a terrific opponent, just as good and tough as a Jeannette or a McVey. However, I lean toward Langford ... just don't think it would be easy ... if it was one of those ten figh series Moore could win decisions in a few for sure if Sam was not at his best.

 

If they would have done a 10 fight series it would end like 6-4 or 6-3-1 or 5-4-1 for Langford. Moore was that good imo.

 

I wouldn't count Moore out. Langford was murderous puncher but Ancient Archie was tricky player. He could set traps and hurt Langford. Depends if Moore could follow his gameplay to box Sam. If it gets rough on inside Tar Baby would had the power and strength to break Moore.

 

I'd bet on Langford...large bet!

 

I think Highly of Langford, however I would not count Archie Moore out in fact Archie was able to diversify. I think Sam had great power and could pressure but Archie could whack as well and has some very good wins over hard punchers in both the Heavyweight and Light heavyweights. There could be an explosive KO either way or a decision. 10 fights or 3 they could split.....How would Archie do vs Sam's opposition, I think well...I think Sam does well against Archies but they may share the same losses. This is a even match-up

 

Langfords weaknesses were:

His short stature.

The fact that he took fights verry regularly, under verry unfavourable circumstances, and fought way past his prime.

Thats about it really.

In adition to his pound for pound status he is a top five all time heavyweight finisher to this day. I am convinced of it.

He was also clever enough to outbox the best boxers of his era. Like Manny Pacquiao, he became more destructive as he moved up in weight because the targets became slower.

 

Pretty dead on ... keep in mind despite his short height he had a long reach.

 

In some ways that gives you the best of both worlds.

You have the range but you can still duck under e.g. Sonny Liston.

 

Exactly! In that regard, Sam was similar to Tommy Burns, though I believe Sam was better.