Sam Langford Vs Big George Foreman

archie moore was only kayoed 7 times in 200 + fights. thats a much better percentage yet u never praise moores chin.

 

I think one problem for Foreman might be the stamina issue, particularly if this was a 1970's Foreman who didn't know how to pace himself very well. Johnson's survival techniques and tendency to tie fighter's up rather effectively, then luring them into the very late rounds could be treacherous for Foreman. It might also prove to be problematic if they fought outdoors on a very hot day. I could see Johnson wearing down Foreman and possibly stopping him late due to shear exhaustion. On the otherhand, Foreman possesed incredible strength and liked to give his opponents a good gut check when on the inside during the clinches, so Johnson might have taken a pretty good beating as well.

Tough fight to call. Either Foreman stops him early or Johnson gets to him late, but I wouldn't bet any money on this one.

 

I'm not really sure. The problem I have with making assumptions about Langford in any fight, is that there is very little film available for me to draw any kind of conclusion. I honestly couldn't tell you what type of fighter he was. History tells us that he certainly defeated many of the very best fighters of his era, but articles, books and boxrec results don't show us what it all looked like. We can conclude however, that he was not untouchable. He was definately beaten by a fair number of men who's credentials ranged anywhere from mediocre to outstanding, so the prospect of an all time great like Foreman beating him is not out of the question, especially given the size dimensions of these two fighters.

 

I like Foreman by early knockout.

 

As much as I want to pick Sam, I think George would knock him out early.

 

I think the discussion was about Sam Langford vs George Foreman.:?

 

Sam Langford was one of the best p4p fighters ever, an absolute wonder.

But, I still feel Foreman's strength, size and power would be a bit too much to overcome for ol' Sam.

However, I wouldn't put it beyond him. Envisaging a situation where Langford survives the fearsome initial onslaught of Foreman and then puts away or outpoints a tired Foreman is not impossible.

 

BIG DEWE HERE= Harry Wills was 6'4" and 225 to 235 at his best with a 82 " arm reach he wasn`t small by any standards of any era. Wills beat Sam unmercifully in both fights. Harry Wills said about the one fight in an interview
that he had Sam up against the ropes in a bad way cuts over both eyes and one of them closed when he woke up in the dressing room and not knowing how the hell he got there. Harry said he was told Sam clocked him with a left hook. Harry said he never saw the damn thing. Then Sam did it again with a right another fight. Wills said that he was only KOed 3 times in his career
twice by SAM LANGFORD and once by Paolino Uzcudun. Wills said he knew what Uzcudun KOed him with as he saw it coming but couldn`t get out of the damn way but Sam Langford I never saw what KOed me in either fight.
I just woke up and I wasn`t in the ring anymore. SAM WOULDN`T STAND IN FRONT OF FOREMAN AS SAM WAS A GREAT BOXER AND STYLIST OF THE
PERIOD NOT A WALK-IN SLUGGER THAT SO MANY YOUNG GUYS THINK HE WAS.

 

BIG DEE HERE= By the way I saw a Lt. Heavyweight blown up to heavyweight make a complete ass out of Foreman twice when I was in High school his name was Gregorio Peralta and he wasn`t a patch as a fighter and boxer that Langford was. Peralta lost a UD to Foreman in the first fight which Referee Mark Conn`s scoring was pathitic at 9rds to 1 Judge Tony Castellano
was absolutely right at 5rds to 4 with 1 even. The second fight for the NABF
heavyweight title Foreman got to Peralta in the 10 rd stopping him in the 15
rounder. I FAVOR BIG GEORGE FOREMAN BUT WHAT I AM SAYING IS LANGFORD HAS FOUGHT GUYS LIKE THIS BEFORE AND I THINK HE WOULD RUN GEORGE OUT OF GAS.

 

JOHNTHOMAS1 HERE = how would BIG DEE see PEAK Foreman vs Peralta?

 

Maybe he was kind to them?

 

BIG DEE HERE= About the same as Peralta was a tough fight for anyone because he was a damn good fighter. Between 1965 to Nov. 17 1973 when he retired Gregorio Peralta only lost to Oscar Bonavena, George Foreman, Ron Lyle and Ray Anderson in a bad decision. He drew with several fighters the two biggest were a rematch with Bonavena and his last fight with Ron Lyle
which many though Peralta won. After the Lyle fight he realized he wouldn`t ever get a fight with then Heavyweight champion George Foreman because of the eariler fights and retired as he was now 38 yrs old and nothing to keep going on to.

 

Cheers DEE. Personally i don't feel he would have given Foreman near as much trouble at the time he held the title.

 

BIG DEE HERE= John he had just given Ron Lyle all he wanted in a 10 rd draw
in 1973 and lost a 10 rd dec the same year. Peralta couldn`t get a fight with the best top 10 fighters. Frazier, Quarry all of them didn`t want to fight the slick *******.

 

I know this is a old post but I am looking at old YouTube fights.

First off Harris Wills was 6'2 not 6'4 so you are a liar. Second Wills weigh 205 to 210 in his prime so again you are a liar. 3rd Fighters back then were way more sloppy than any modern fighter. No jab or anything else. Just a bunch of wild swinging.

Foreman crushes Langford in 1 round tops. Trying to compare fighters from 100 plus years ago to modern fighters is pretty silly since how much the styles and rules have changed.