What fighter do you think gets to much credit and gets overrated in legacy terms?

[Terry A]

[QUOTE=JAB5239; We don't all agree all the time, but there are some really solid posters in this section that have a ton of knowledge. I learn new things about fighters here almost daily.[/QUOTE]



I couldn't agree more! Nothing wrong with disagreeing, but do it in a professional or mature way. Show respect to the other fellas who contribute regularly, because they DO know their boxing.

Like you Jab, I learn new things all the time. This is a great source for info and insights. My one wish is that we all lived real close by and could have weekly or monthly meetings and hang out some. Our wives could cook us some good food while we "mingle" about mangling! I'm 50 now and just got into the internet for the first time a few years ago. I discovered this place late. Didn't know such a thing as a boxing forum where you could BS about fighters even existed.

[ßringer]

I find it hilarious everybody picking on Hopkins is either a bonafide Tito supporter, or a Kelly Pavlik fan. Epic.

As for my picks, I'd go with Oscar De La Hoya first, for obvious reasons.

And Felix Trinidad second.

I catch an awful lot of flack for that second pick, but to me, Trinidad is as overrated as they come.

Granted his accomplishments are pretty damn special, on paper.

But as far as boxing skill and technique go, he's one of the worst I've seen in my 13 years following this game.

He was a big puncher who everybody fell in love with, because everybody loves a big punch. That's it.

Anytime he found himself unable to land that big punch, he was completely outclassed and embarassed by his smarter, more fundamental opponet. (Oscar, Bernard, Winky)

[res]

Johnson was "far" longer, but not Dempsey. Dempsey had 6 successful title defenses in about 4 years before losing to Tunney three years after his fight with Firpo. Three of the years he held the title, he was inactive so we can't count them. I do wonder had Dempsey not been inactive for 3 years, would he have beaten Tunney. Three years is a long time for a Pro fighter to be inactive, especially a Rich Pro Fighter that is Champion. Tunney was good though, no question.

True, and the Dempsey that fought Firpo does not look like the Dempsey that fought Tunney.

[Yogi]

Fair enough. I understand your thinking, hope you understand mine.

And Jab, thanks for the link. I'll check it out. Machine, good thoughts in your posts. I'm still not drinking the Sam Langford Kool-Aid, but I'm at least now holding the glass, looking at it.

"I think Langford was the greatest fighter we ever had." - Jack Dempsey

"The greatest fighter of them all, bar none, was Sam Langford." - Harry Wills

"Langford was the greatest fighter who ever lived. Sam would have been champion any time Johnson had given him a fight, and Johnson knew it better than anybody. Man! How that baby could hit. Nobody could hit like that. Well, maybe Joe Louis could, but don't forget that Sam only weighed about 160 pounds. Louis was about 195." - Joe Jeannette

"Who's the best fighter I ever saw? That's an easy one. Sam Langford and nobody ever came close to being as good as he was at his peak." - Gunboat Smith

"Now there was a fighter for you. Sam Langford! Yes, sir, in my book he was just about the greatest of them all." - Abe Attell


Just a few examples of how highly Langford was thought of by his peers in the ring (and there's other quotes of similiar nature from that era of fighters), and if you want to question his punching power look to Jeannette's comments above and know that those thoughts were also echoed by Wills, Jack Johnson, Fireman Flynn, Ketchel, and a host of other opponents who felt the power in his punch and spoke of it in the highest terms possible.


Some more quotes by those who were covering the sport and these coming from the most prominant sportswriters of the time and one of the most prominant promoters of the early days;


"Sam was about the best fighting man I have ever watched." - Grantland Rice

"Sam Langford was the greatest fighter, pound for pound, who ever lived." - Hype Igoe

"Langford was probably the best the ring ever saw." - Joe Williams

"Sam Langford was the greatest fighter of the time." - Hugh McIntosh

Etc., etc., etc.

As far as his number of losses go...well, I can tell you that boxrec isn't exactly accurate with a few of their "NWS" (vs. Jeannette, Barry*, etc.) based on the majority opinion of the sportswriters of the time, and it's also worth noting that a number of the official decisions that didn't go Langford's way (losses and draws) were thought of as bad decisions by the press covering the fights.

* Here's one example of quite a few;


"New York, Sept 25--Sam Langford, of Boston, scored a victory over Jim Barry, of Chicago, at the Sharkey Athletic Club here tonight. He outpointed his opponent in every round and several times had the Westerner in a dazed condition.

In the first the negro tripped while backing away from one of Barry's rushes and before he could recover himself Barry struck him a slight right-hand swing on the jaw and felled him. Langford got up in a jiffy and fought back fiercely.

Langford scored a clean knockdown in the second round.

When Barry got up, after he had fallen, the Boston man landed a hard right and left swing to the jaw, and while Barry was reeling from side to side, landed another terrific left-hand swing to the same spot, and Barry struck the floor with a thud.

Langford had the better of the third and fourth rounds. After they had clinched several times in the fifth, Barry landed a hard right-swing on Langford's jaw, but the latter merely grinned and retaliated by three straight jabs on his opponents face and jaw.

Barry was extremely tired and hung on to prevent being knocked out.

Barry showed signs of fatigue in the final round and was content to fight at long range. At this style Langford was much the superior, and landed three blows to Barry's one."

- The Washington Herald, Sept 26th, 1907, and the opinion that Langford got the better of the fight was echoed in the Trenton Evening News, Boston Daily Globe, and even Barry's hometown paper of the Chicago Daily Tribune.


Compare this writeup to the brief and minority (i.e. only differing) opinion in the NY Times, which doesn't even have a full paragraph on the fight and only says that Barry had a "slight advantage", and you have reason to question boxrec's listing of that fight...especially when the NY Times have printed other information on Langford's fights that is contradictory to what everyone else wrote in their papers (I'm speaking of one of the Jeannette fights here), may have been factually incorrect, and gives me the impression that they didn't even have a reporter there covering it.

Anyways, I'm babbling endlessly here, but I could go on about this stuff some more if you have any questions on anything related to Langford.

Bottom line, though, is don't judge a fighter based mostly on what it says on some incomplete* and often times innaccurate internet site from 100 years after Langford was at his best.

* Langford estimates that he had between five and six hundred professional fights, with a former writer by the name of Lud Shahbazian giving him credit for 642 when announcing Langford's death in his column. Both estimates are very likely more accurate to the truth than what boxrec has listed.

[hunkysoupbone]

After reading Yogi's post (who I appreciate putting that much time in to it) and everybody elses opinion, I hearby officially retract and ammend my previous post regarding the honorable Sam Langford being over-rated.

I learned things about him that the record book could never expound on. And I really do appreciate the good spirit in which the more knowing members here informed me that I was mistaken. You all earned my respect even more.

Sam Langford, from all that I've read here, really was a great fighter. I learned much.
Thanks!

[Yogi]

After reading Yogi's post (who I appreciate putting that much time in to it) and everybody elses opinion, I hearby officially retract and ammend my previous post regarding the honorable Sam Langford being over-rated.

I learned things about him that the record book could never expound on. And I really do appreciate the good spirit in which the more knowing members here informed me that I was mistaken. You all earned my respect even more.

Sam Langford, from all that I've read here, really was a great fighter. I learned much.
Thanks!

Cheers, Soupbone, and here's a little poem for you expressing how feared Langford was when he was just about to hit his peak as a fighter;


Who'll fight Sam Langford?
"Not I," said Stanley K.,
"Britt has taken me away
And I'm signed to do a play.
Then I'm going to the hay.
I'll not fight Sam Langford."

Who'll fight Sam Langford?
"Not I," said Jack the Twin,
"I am careful of my chin
And I'm pretty near all in,
And suicide's a sin.
I'll not fight Sam Langford."

Who'll fight Sam Langford?
"Not I," is Papke's wail,
"I'm a lily white and pail
And my life is not for sale;
Why I'd sooner go to jail.
I'll not fight Sam Langford."

Who'll fight Sam Langford?
"Not I," said Kid McCoy,
"I'm a pretty game old boy,
But this unrefined employ
I will leave for hoi polloi.
I'll not fight Sam Langford."

Who'll fight Sam Langford?
"Not I," said poor old Fitz,
"Though I'd fight for just six bits
Still I haven't lost my wits;
I'll preserve my speckled mits.
I'll not fight Sam Langford."

Who'll fight Sam Langford?
"Not I," said Hugo Kelly,
"He would pound me to a jelly
And I'd lose some vermicalli.
Not for me. What ta helli?
I'll not fight Sam Langford."

Who'll fight Sam Langford?
"Not I," said Joe da Grim,
"I no like to fight with him
Cause he shutta up my glim
And da chances are to slim.
I'll notta fight Sam Langford."

Who'll fight Sam Langford?
"Not I," Al Kaufman said,
"You are crazy in the head.
Chase yourself and go to bed.
I ain't anxious to be dead.
I'll not fight Sam Langford."

Who'll fight Sam Langford?
"Not us," the low brows cried
And they turned around to hide.
"Nix; the color line is wide,
And we're going to stay inside.
We'll not fight Sam Langford."


- written by William O'Connell McGeehan, circa 1907, which would have been around the time that a few of those fighters (including Langford, who also had support in England as champion) were raising their hands in the air as the successor to Tommy Ryan as world middleweight champion.

[Southpaw16BF]

It was belived when Langford and Ketchel met on March 27th 1910, Langford had to not look to impressive against Stanley, so he could get his title shot, when they next fought each other. It was also belived Ketchel was that wary of Langofrd power and skills in the ring, he had made people go and spy on Langford in his training camp, to make sure Langford was not training to hard for it or going full out in training.

Langford is also of belived to had the better of Ketchel when they fought, and some class it as a Langford victory. But back then(in that era) some things are not fact, and some say Ketchel was more than holding his own with Langford etc. Alot of boxing people have different views and stories on this fight.

Its just a shame Langford and Ketchel never fought for the Middlweight title as Langford was promised, It is also belived Ketchel wound't agree to a full out bout with Langford either, Ketchel would be shot the same year (1910-10-15)

Here's some article's about the fight
''Langford was at his peak at middleweight when Stanley Ketchel was the world middleweight champion. Nat Fleischer wrote, “One hesitates to say that Ketchel, reknowned deservedly for his gameness, was afraid of Langford. But the fact remains that Stanley had refused several offers to meet Langford in a distance bout.”

They did finally meet in a 6 round no decision affair. The April 28, 1910 Philadelphia Bulletin reported “Sam Langford, of Boston, defeated Stanley Ketchel of Grand Rapids, Mich., in a 6 round bout at the National Club last night.” Langford established a superior jab in the first two rounds. In the third he “shook Ketchel badly with swings to the head.” In the fourth he “twice shook Ketchel with jaw punches and brought the blood from the mouth and nose with well timed jabs.” Langford let up in the last two rounds. “To sum it up, Langford was much the stronger and cleverer and his jabs had a disconcerting effect on Ketchel…the colored man looked to be in pretty good shape at the close, but Ketchel was tired and wild and the sound of the bell was a welcome interruption.” The newspaper verdict, contrary to some later published reports, was in favor of Langford''
http://coxscorner.tripod.com/langford.html

Ketchel and Langford will have to fight again to settle the question of supremacy. They went a hard six-round bout at the National athletic club here and were both on their feet, able to continue, with plenty of strength and aggressiveness when the battle ended, with no decision by the referee. No knockdowns were scored in spite of the terrific hitting power of both men, and while there seems to be no doubt that they tried to do their best , they will probably come together in a longer fight in California next July for a large purse."(Marion Daily Star) Using a poll of 13 NY and Philadelphia newspapers, 7 had Langford ahead, 4 Ketchel, and 2 had it a draw. Thus, the mark of a Langford newspaper win.
Source-BOXREC.

[American_Ninja]

Lennox Lewis is one overrated boxer. "My Legacy", my ass......

[Yogi]

Coffroth signed Langford and Ketchel to a longer distance fight (a reported 45 rounder for a overall purse of $30,000 spilt 60/40 to the winner) that was supposed to take place in July 2nd, 1910 in California, but it was eventually a promoter by the name of Sid Hester (with backing from Tom O'Day) who took over the promotion of the fight when the location was moved to Reno. Hester's plan was then to move the date to the 4th of July as part of a morning feature to the Johnson-Jeffires bout later that same day, although Hester would have used a different venue due to Rickard being opposed to the idea.

All for not, though, as it was about a week or so before the fight when Hester announced;

"I am in receipt of authentic information that Ketchel has not been taking proper care of himself and is not now and could not get into proper fighting shape. Rather than burden the people of Reno with a match of this sort, I have decided to wash my hands of the whole affair and call it off. Langford, so far as I know, is in fine condition and would enter the ring willingly. As for Ketchel--well, that's another story."

- statement made by Hester on June 23rd and printed in a number of different sources the next day

And that put the end to any real chance of a legitimate Langford-Ketchel battle, as Ketchel's "not taking proper care of himself" comment from Hester would only touch the surface of what ended up being a downward spiral for Ketchel and his health problems which troubled him until his death.

Worth noting, though, that Ketchel gave mixed signals throughout his time in regards to him facing Langford, as it was less than a year before when both him and Langford were in New York signed to fight in a ten rounder at the Fairmount Athletic Club, only to see the Governor of the state nix the fight within a day or two of it taking place (this would have been Sept of 1909). Had Hughes not put a stop to it, I would think that it almost assuredly would have happened as scheduled.

[KostyaTszyu44]

Langford was a pretty remarkable fighter

i admit i dont know a ton about him , but i do know he was never given a title shot, thats messed up......