The Evening World scored Langford a *shutout* over Joe Gans. Sam was 17 at the time.

From what I know, Ketchell was already planning on retirement, as he was already pretty used up both mentally and physically due to a combo of in-ring wear and tear and outside factors such as addictive drug use.

Typical yellow journalism jotted down well afterwards to propel legends and bring an air of mystique to the topic. Kinda like the Bible.

 

thanks for the post el:good

beat up any drug dealers lately?

 

Nope, but I've recently joined a gang of roaming Tom Brokaws:

[yt]rEh4UQXUKWo[/yt]

 

Wow brilliant stuff from Sam. I confess I've never really been as interested in his career relative to how much press he gets on this forum but this win seriously intrigues me. I'll have to look to his record more.

 

The last letter Ketchel ever wrote talks about how he is through with boxing and has purchased land around Springfield Mo where intends to open a ranch and lumber concern.

 

Mc, Stanley Ketchel's fighting prime was abut 154-58 pounds. He was considered by every sportswriter of his time as the greatest middleweight
of his time, [excluding Fitz, a physical freak] and beyond Ketchels time.We today,should place much credence to eyewitnesses who saw the great Ketchel in his prime. A great alltime middleweight who except for 2 films of him we see today,of beating Billy Papke,in 1909 when Stanley broke a bone in his hand,and still won a TWENTY round decision, and of course the fiasco against Jack Johnson ,nine months before Ketchel was shot and killed by Walter Dipley in 1910. We have no films of Ketchel flattening 49 opponents
in his violent career. Therefore we must judge the Michigan Assassin by
his record and the opinions of great boxing writers as Hype Igoe,Damon
Runyon, Bob Edgren, Nat Fleischer,Phil Jack O;Brien, all who saw Ketchel and
praised him to the skies. As I do.
Sam Langford might have been a greater P4P fighter than Ketchel,but not as
a 158 pound middleweight. Langford was a bigger framed fighter, as Archie Moore was a bigger framed fighter than Ray Robinson, of later years.
As posted before Langford had about 12-15 pounds on Ketchel, lest we forget
Cheers M...

 

:thinkso at 158 pounds, you would say ketchel was langfords better? admittedly, langfords prime weight was a touch heavier from my understanding but you would say at the middleweight limit, the michigan assassin was the better?

 

good win, but gans wasn't properly prepared. he got exposed for taking langford lightly, but take him lightly he did.

 

J,who is to say how would the 158 pound Sam Langford fared against the prime middleweight Ketchel.? In 1908 Langford fought Joe Jeannette at 165 pounds. He was morphing into a 180-85 pound fighter, and getting down to 158 pounds,against Ketchel in 1909, might have weakened Sam, just as Jake LaMotta,was weakened greatly losing 10 pounds just before his ko at the hands of Ray Robinson in 1951. Take care...

 

Tip the hat to also to George Barton who stated long ago in his book that Sam was all time number 1 Lt Heavy.

http://www.bookfinder.com/search/?a...0a%20barton&title=my%20lifetime%20in%20sports