Where does Langford rank at HW?

Seamus,

Have you seen Liston vs Lang or Hauge on film? he's pretty impressive. Watch him vs Flynn slowed down to normal speed and you will be impressed with his offensive skill, ferociousness, and power.

Sam was short, but he really was not " small " More like he was compact, with long arms and a thick neck.

 

Here is a picture of Sam Langford with Joe Louis which shows just how solidly built he was:

http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://www.corbisimages.com/images/67/A8709305-BF1E-4173-B799-EB6C1BCE80E1/U773587INP.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.corbisimages.com/Enlargement/U773587INP.html&usg=__tBFaTeKDT7pmJRBsEDAo4X9yA1s=&h=480&w=614&sz=67&hl=en&start=0&tbnid=vUH8qbzmLRbRCM:&tbnh=106&tbnw=136&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsam%2Blangford%2Bjoe%2Blouis%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26rlz%3D1W1SUNC_en%26biw%3D1419%26bih%3D676%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=rc&dur=158&ei=NDdoTJHtOcqsOM7_5LkF&oei=NDdoTJHtOcqsOM7_5LkF&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=37&ved=1t:429,r:2,s:0&tx=73&ty=50

http://www.corbisimages.com/Enlargement/U306247ACME.html

In this picture you are seeing two of the best heavyweight finishers in the history of gloved boxing.

 

You mean, Sam Lang and Hauge? Yup and I love Langford. Like I said, lb for lb, everything taken into consideration, he floats between 1 and 2 in my ATG rankings. And I am sure he could take out a few bigger heavies of the modern era. But I really think putting him in the context of just a heavyweight, really constricts his greatness.

Still, I admire anyone making the argument.

 

You're largely preaching to the choir here. I just find it difficult to believe once in a millennia talents really exist. I also see certain flaws of Langford on film (and all fighters, even the greatest have flaws) so he was not superman.

Like I said, I like the sentiment of your argument, and think Langford is under-appreciated though Moyle's book is helping... I just don't buy a top-10 ranking with all the usual criteria balanced.

 

I heard that Langford went nblind in his left eye in a fight in 1917. Then he almost lost all of his site in his right eye against Tiger Flowers in '22. Still KO'ed Flowers, and KO'ed some guy in Mexico for the Heavyweigth Championship of Mexico. He didn't retire until he 1926 so basically was fighting for a decade with almost no vision. That's incredible if its true. Just having to feel his way waround the ring and only able to see a shadow of his opponent. And still winning these fights.

 

The fact that Langford beat Wills at all (KO'd him twice) is quite amazing, allowing that Wills was "quite skilled" and stood 6'2 or 6'3 and weighed 210 pounds.
Even if Wills was on the level of a Berbick or a Pinklon, or even just a Ruiz, it happened that the short 5'6 or 5'7 Langford stood up to him and knocked him out.
I dont believe in " once in a millennia talents" (as far as I understand the concept) either, but Langford did beat Wills.

Standing up to and beating up and KOing McVey, who was a 5'10 and 210 type with a build somewhere between that of a Frazier and a Tyson, is impressive enough too, considering that Langford was probably out of shape at anything over 185 pounds, and is sometimes painted as a puffed up middleweight.
Even if McVey's not a greatly skilled boxer he was certainly a bona fide heavyweight even by today's standards.

It's clear that Langford did slay "giants". It's also true that Jack Johnson and Harry Wills, and even Fred Fulton, could be argued to have established head-to-head superiority over him with size and skill being factors. I doubt the likes of Bearcat Wright and Sandy Ferguson were super-skillful world-beaters, but they probably weren't any more primitive than a string of modern middling fringe contenders and solid journeyman of the same size.

Dont look for the "analogous fighter at 5 foot 6, weighing at his best around 180 out there recently slaying giant, skilled heavyweights/decent sized heavies." ...... because although there might have been a few who would have been capable of doing so, a 170 or 180 pound puncher who might have KO'd a Berbick 2 out of 10 times, it is a completely insane way to conduct one's career in modern era.
In Langford's day they had no choice. Mostly the "light-heavyweight division" wasn't even recognized, anyone over 160 or 154 was in the heavyweights. And fighting for money meant fighting anyone if you were rated good.
If Langford came along in later decades, he'd be fighting men his own weight, and he'd be motivated to stay at 160 or 175, and maybe cruiserweight. He wouldn't need to go up to heavyweight and KO some 215 pounder just to prove a point, because there would probably always be someone at heavyweight who would punish him with height and reach. I wouldn't fancy his chances against a Lewis, or a Klitschko, or Holmes, Ali or Holyfield. I think he'd beat Patterson, and Frazier's worth a shot at, maybe even Tyson in a kill-or-be-killed challenge.

 

Langford beat him twice out of what 15 oppertunities? It's impressive, but not THAT impressive if you think about it. I think many of the other sub 200lb heavyweight champions would have beaten Wills 2x out of 15 if they got the oppertunity, even if they were slightly past there prime.

 

Yes, I know Langford KO'd Wills. It's quite an accomplishment, no doubt. However, THEY FOUGHT 22 TIMES in an era when preparation (especially for colored fighters) was a luxury rarely allowed, when fighters went in the ring with significant injuries or insignificant experience and when many fights frankly were not entirely on the level. The odds of such outcomes were much higher in those days. In this day, though, people don't fight each other 22 times, they usually get thorough and lengthy preparation, don't fight with major injuries and compete on relatively level ground.

Lastly, McVea took a good picture but having analyzed his record and seen the scant film on him, I don't hold him in as high esteem as the company he kept.

 

Well, Langford KO'd Wills twice in their first FIVE meetings. For what it's worth. He was 2-3 at the beginning of the series.

I agree that it's fair to say Wills established superiority over Langford. That's what I was saying.
It's amazing that Langford can KO Wills, but it's NOT that amazing that he had to be some "once in a millenia talent".
These were exactly the points I was trying to make in my previous post.

Good points Seamus, but Langford's probably the guy who suffered most from the injuries/over-activity and being asked to throw or extend fights, if not only because of his crazy schedule.

I pretty much in full agreement with all those points above though.

He was a tough cookie though, at the very least.

 

All those dudes, white and black, were back in the day. This, I truly believe.

 

Tough Times Make Tough Men !!!