Sam Langford

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Check_Hook, Jan 3, 2011.


Page 2 of 4
  1. TommyV

    TommyV Loyal Member banned

    32,127
    41
    Nov 2, 2007
    Rest assured, this man would have held titles if not for a combination of reasons. Harry Wills never became heavyweight champion and he is arguably a top 15 heavyweight of all-time, possibly top 10 even or borderline. Race had a lot to do with it in those days.

    If Langford were granted shots at titles he would have certainly won one. The matter is that he did beat Barbados Joe Walcott - who was the Welterweight World Champion - but didn't get the decision.

    If they had 4 belts around and 17 weight classes back in those days and he went after titles, he could have picked up literally dozens of belts across about 8 weight classes, seriously.

    Also as for records, they are very deceiving given the regularity, quality and often circumstances with which the top guys fought [be it on relatively short notice, after long journeys where they couldn't get around as easily as today, while massively outweighed] and so losses weren't treated as badly as they are today. The draws I already explained with the pre-arranged method to them, that if you neither guy was knocked out, neither apparently deserved the win regardless of who was winning the fight up to that point.
     
    TommyV, Jan 3, 2011
    TommyV, Jan 3, 2011
    #16
  2. Check_Hook

    Check_Hook Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,478
    3
    Jul 23, 2010
    As i have said i dont no much about pre 1950's boxing so i was using boxrec for an example i dont claim to know about him, i am asking people who claim to know so much and rank him as the greatest of all time
     
    Check_Hook, Jan 3, 2011
    Check_Hook, Jan 3, 2011
    #17
  3. Leonard

    Leonard Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,225
    15
    Sep 19, 2009
    i think it's also good to hear the opinion of others aside from what we can read from the internet. i've noticed langford seemed to have long arms, great advantage against bigger opponents. how does his style hold up though if he were to compete with modern boxers?
     
    Leonard, Jan 3, 2011
    Leonard, Jan 3, 2011
    #18
  4. Swarmer

    Swarmer Patrick Full Member

    19,654
    52
    Jan 19, 2010
    Point taken, but my advice would be to hit up cyberboxingzone or another primary source treasure trove. Boxrec has its uses, but let me tell you as someone who just took a stats course in college: without context raw numbers like that are kinda meaningless. Instead of focusing on someone's W-D-L ratio it makes a lot more sense to read an article or articles, research and watch their competition, and then decide for yourself.

    Out of all the turn of the century guys i think his style holds up the best along with Ketchel and Gans. Like I said if you can find the Jeannette film(who looks like a burley/roy jones character) i think that Langford looks a lot like some ****ed up cross between Dwight Muhammad Qawi and James Toney. He might have to modify his skillset to throw more sustained combos and work on his outside fighting but he can close the distance and slip and block punches extremely well and throws powerful, compact punches. Hard to see him not bulldozing most SMWs, LHWs, and even a great deal of Heavies, actually.
     
    Swarmer, Jan 3, 2011
    Swarmer, Jan 3, 2011
    #19
  5. TommyV

    TommyV Loyal Member banned

    32,127
    41
    Nov 2, 2007
    Yeah, Cyberboxing is an excellent, excellent site for researching some of the old-timers. Cox's Corner is good aswell, and it can also be helpful to search Google Archives were you can find a lot of fight reports on some of the older generation fighters.
     
    TommyV, Jan 3, 2011
    TommyV, Jan 3, 2011
    #20
  6. Leonard

    Leonard Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,225
    15
    Sep 19, 2009
    :thumbsup cool
     
    Leonard, Jan 3, 2011
    Leonard, Jan 3, 2011
    #21
  7. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,008
    48,103
    Mar 21, 2007
    Greatest of all times for me, for sure.

    When he was a teenager he was matched with the world's best fighter, and the best pure-boxer and ring general of pre-30's boxing, and one of the best of all time - Joe Gans. Gans was in his prime, and the lightweight champion of the world. Langford and he were matched at 140lbs, and it seems Gans took him lightly. Some notes from thei fight:

    Langford had Gans worried.

    Langford confidently went after Gans in the second round with jabs to the face...Gans would lead only to fall short, then Langford would step in with a straight left. Either Gans judges range poorly (!) or his opponents extreme cleverness caused him to miss often.

    During the bout, Gans landed but a dozen clean blows on Langford, who blocked immensely.

    The decision in Langford's favour was greeted with cheers."


    The San Fransisco Chronicle notes that, "Langford...was awarded the decision, but not the title as he was overweight". It is unclear whether the fight was made at 135 and Langford came in over or the fight was non-title from the start, but my guess is the later. The Chronicle also expressly compiments Langford's footwork.


    What I think the fight reports indicate - a novice Langford utterly outclassed a master boxer in terms of generalship, rangefinding, footwork and delivery. He also ramped up the aggression at exactly the right point to close the show winning "all 8 of the final rounds" according to the Chronicle, and all 15 according to the Evening World. Basically, a young Langford bosses one of the greatest lightweights and master boxes of all time.

    All drawn from day after reports. Another:



    Boston Journal

    His right was also always ready to drive and followed the left quickly on the jab and his most effective attack was to poke his left to the head and then swing his right over. Gans avoided several vicious swings by timely ducking and his ring science pulled him out of several bad places.

    His favorite style was to get in close and hook his right to the head and he drove Langford to cover with the maneuver. The bout lacked the fire and aggressiveness that have characterized other affairs, as the boys made it a stand-off test, not taking any chances at mixing it too often. Langford was more inclined to force matters, but could not prevail upon Gans to catch the fever and he stuck to his task of outpointing the champion.


    Now, Gans was hampered - he had fought that week and had had a very long train journey, and was apparently complaining of a minor stomach injury - so it's important not to go to far, but what astonishes me is that Langford is described repeatedly as out-boxing and out-generalling Gans - and Gans is is one of the best boxers and generals of all time (peer to peer). Can anyone imagine a teenager out-boxing Floyd Mayweather? Because that is basically what happened (only Gans was seen as more dominant, meeting, as he did, all comers).

    Now fast forwards to 1916. Langford is fighting the world's best HW's and beats Harry Wills in the 19th round with a one-punch KO. Wills is #10 on my all time HW's list.

    Say what you like about what happened in between and after - and for the most part it is extraordinary - but what's undeniable is that Langford has gone from beating the best pound for pound in the world with boxing at 140lbs to beating the best HW in the world with one punch. To me, that is the single most extraordinary thing that has ever happened in boxing.
     
    McGrain, Jan 3, 2011
    McGrain, Jan 3, 2011
    #22
  8. Check_Hook

    Check_Hook Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,478
    3
    Jul 23, 2010
    By defeating the best from 140 to HW is unbelievable no one can deny that, but i think people forget as you said what happend in-between.

    A great feat defeating Wills, but one punch KO, it was the 19th round im suprised either of them had anything left to give. You failed to mention that Wills had beaten him 13 times.

    Out of interest what is you top 10 HW list

    I feel any HW fighting a man 3 times so much smaller in size and weight nowadays, never mind 15 times, would be criticised no end. Again i am not discrediting Wills.
     
    Check_Hook, Jan 3, 2011
    Check_Hook, Jan 3, 2011
    #23
  9. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,008
    48,103
    Mar 21, 2007
    Langford forced HW's to fight him by tearing up the division. If you don't fight a man who is ranked #2, or #5 because he is small you will be laughed at.

    Still, imagine a fighter out-boxing Floyd at 140 and then knocking out Haye at HW. It's just not possible.

    What happened in between was Langford built one of the deepest resumes in boxing history over many different weight classes.
     
    McGrain, Jan 3, 2011
    McGrain, Jan 3, 2011
    #24
  10. TommyV

    TommyV Loyal Member banned

    32,127
    41
    Nov 2, 2007
    What d'you mean what happened in between? In between, he was arguably robbed against a top 10 welterweight and top 25 P4P ATG great Barbado Joe Walcott, beat top 7 middleweight and top 40/45 P4P ATG great Stanley Ketchel over 6 rounds, and a host of top heavyweight contenders.

    And? Yes he had a poor record against Wills overall, but Wills was a top 15 heavyweight of all-time, in his prime. Langford wasn't for the most part, and wasn't a natural heavy.

    Take a natural 168lber, Carl Froch for example and put him in with a top 20 heavyweight of all-time from his era - Wlad Klitschko. If Froch were to fight Wlad 15 times, loss 13 mostly on points yet knock him out twice, his all-time standing would increase greatly despite the poor record.
     
    TommyV, Jan 3, 2011
    TommyV, Jan 3, 2011
    #25
  11. Check_Hook

    Check_Hook Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,478
    3
    Jul 23, 2010
    Yes again as i said im not doubting his wins, there's no doubt that there quality in there, he also has many losses to novice fighters with under 10 fights or losses to fighters with terrible records. And before you say it yes i understand that fighters fought more often them days.

    Im not saying Langford is not one of the greatest of all time, i just cant see how people count him as the greatest.

    But who am i to judge like i said my knowledge of the old school isnt great. i just feel some of them get massively overrated.
     
    Check_Hook, Jan 3, 2011
    Check_Hook, Jan 3, 2011
    #26
  12. charlie brown

    charlie brown Guest

    :lol::lol::lol::patsch
     
    charlie brown, Jan 3, 2011
    charlie brown, Jan 3, 2011
    #27
  13. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,008
    48,103
    Mar 21, 2007
    No, they have ten fights according to Boxrec. It's a sad truth that Boxrec is sadly incomplete, sadly, i'm sad about it. I'm only a hobbyist but i've uncovered half a dozen Jack Johnson fights that are not on Boxrec.

    People count him the greatest based upon the greatest win resume across the vastests range of weights of any fighter in history in combination.


    He's massively underated, speaking as someone whose knowledge of the old school is great :D
     
    McGrain, Jan 3, 2011
    McGrain, Jan 3, 2011
    #28
  14. Swarmer

    Swarmer Patrick Full Member

    19,654
    52
    Jan 19, 2010
    it doesn't really make much sense to say someone or their era is over or underrated if you're simultaneously asking about their career
     
    Swarmer, Jan 3, 2011
    Swarmer, Jan 3, 2011
    #29
  15. TommyV

    TommyV Loyal Member banned

    32,127
    41
    Nov 2, 2007
    Just because you are well-known clown around these parts and don't know anything about boxing, doesn't make it laughable. What's more laughable is you arguing with it. Barbados Joe Walcott was a definite ATG.
     
    TommyV, Jan 3, 2011
    TommyV, Jan 3, 2011
    #30
Page 2 of 4