P4P The Greatest Fighter who ever Lived

[Kid McCoy]

you are making your case for Langford and i am making my case for Robinson yet your case in built on Langford beating some 2nd tear fighters who weighed 200lbs.

Yet what is your case for Robinson? He never beat a light-heavyweight in his life, let alone KO'd one, and you're asking him to beat one of the greatest, hardest-punching light-heavies ever. Having a hard time beating Georgie Abrams, Gene Fullmer, Carmen Basilio and Jake LaMotta does not bode well for a Langford fight.

You may think Wills, Jeannette and McVea mediocre (they weren't) but being top fighters about 40lbs and three full divisions bigger than Robinson, I'd wager they would be substantially harder to KO than he was. Can you see 6'3", 210lb Wills being knocked through the ropes by LaMotta or being in a fog for a few rounds after being hit by Artie Levine?

In his prime Robinson weighed in the region of 150lbs. Langford weighed around 170lbs. That's a significant size difference. Langford is stronger, a stone heavier at least, a much harder hitter and with a track record of surviving and beating Hall of Fame heavyweights against a guy who peaked at welterweight and never beat anything bigger than a middleweight. The great bigger man beats the great smaller man.

[sonnyboyx2]

Yet what is your case for Robinson? He never beat a light-heavyweight in his life, let alone KO'd one, and you're asking him to beat one of the greatest, hardest-punching light-heavies ever. Having a hard time beating Georgie Abrams, Gene Fullmer, Carmen Basilio and Jake LaMotta does not bode well for a Langford fight.

You may think Wills, Jeannette and McVea mediocre (they weren't) but being top fighters about 40lbs and three full divisions bigger than Robinson, I'd wager they would be substantially harder to KO than he was. Can you see 6'3", 210lb Wills being knocked through the ropes by LaMotta or being in a fog for a few rounds after being hit by Artie Levine?

In his prime Robinson weighed in the region of 150lbs. Langford weighed around 170lbs. That's a significant size difference. Langford is stronger, a stone heavier at least, a much harder hitter and with a track record of surviving and beating Hall of Fame heavyweights against a guy who peaked at welterweight and never beat anything bigger than a middleweight. The great bigger man beats the great smaller man.

this is nothing whatsoever to do with weather Robinson could KO guys at light-heavyweight or above, this is about who was the greatest P4P fighter and the general opinion is that Ray Robinson is Number 1...Langford if weighing 160lbs would also have great difficulty in beating LaMotta, Fullmer, Abrams & Basilio.. you talk as if it would be a "piece of piss" for Langford in a fight with those guys yet the reality is that they would pose huge problems for him as they did Robinson... Both Robinson & Langford started their career's at 135lb yet Langford was physically the bigger man although not in height but in size & reach he was huge compared to Robinson so it was far easier for him to hold his own at 180lbs.. Robinson won world titles whereas Langford never, colored fighters fighting eachother at the turn of the century was known to carry eachother with their fights being little more than glorified sparring sessions which is why promoters would not touch them and they struggled to gain world title fights, this is about who was No1 and Robinson due to his grace & beauty in the ring as well as his incredible resume has to rightly be the No1

[Kid McCoy]

this is nothing whatsoever to do with weather Robinson could KO guys at light-heavyweight or above, this is about who was the greatest P4P fighter and the general opinion is that Ray Robinson is Number 1...Langford if weighing 160lbs would also have great difficulty in beating LaMotta, Fullmer, Abrams & Basilio.. you talk as if it would be a "piece of piss" for Langford in a fight with those guys yet the reality is that they would pose huge problems for him as they did Robinson... Both Robinson & Langford started their career's at 135lb yet Langford was physically the bigger man although not in height but in size & reach he was huge compared to Robinson so it was far easier for him to hold his own at 180lbs.. Robinson won world titles whereas Langford never, colored fighters fighting eachother at the turn of the century was known to carry eachother with their fights being little more than glorified sparring sessions which is why promoters would not touch them and they struggled to gain world title fights, this is about who was No1 and Robinson due to his grace & beauty in the ring as well as his incredible resume has to rightly be the No1

I thought the issue was who would win if they fought? You think Robinson would win, I don't, and I've stated my reasons. Whatever difficulties Langford would have with LaMotta and co, Robinson would have immeasurably more problems with Jeannette, Wills and McVea. It's ludicrous to even imagine him fighting those three. Btw, the consensus of the IBRO historians has Wills, who you regard as second rate, as the 18th greatest heavyweight of all time.

It's harsh to hold it against Sam for not winning a title, since he was never given the opportunity. If Robinson had been ducked as much Langford he would never have won a world title either.

Sam's resume is every bit as incredible as Robinson's. Taking account of newspaper decisions, he has about 30 wins against Hall of Famers, and scores against assorted top contenders. In his 25th pro fight he beat Joe Gans, a win which arguably trumps any single win in Robinson's career. He beat greats from lightweight all the way up to heavyweight and despite what you stated in that other thread, Jack Johnson repeatedly turned down big offers to give him a title shot. Jack must have done that for a reason.

[sonnyboyx2]

this ia about P4P who was No1 and IMO its Robinson, your opinion its Langford and i appreciate your opinion yet no amount of discussion is going to change my mind and the same can be said of yourself, you have stated Langfords case of which you have made a good job of doing so all beit i already knew, yet we have not stated the case for Robinson being the
P4P No1 even tho the majority of posters on this topic have voiced their opinions that Robinson is rightly No1 but rather than take it up now we will call a halt and agree that we are all entitled to our opinions and unlike Greatest1942 we wont slate one another off simply because our opinions differ.

[Kid McCoy]

this ia about P4P who was No1 and IMO its Robinson, your opinion its Langford and i appreciate your opinion yet no amount of discussion is going to change my mind and the same can be said of yourself, you have stated Langfords case of which you have made a good job of doing so all beit i already knew, yet we have not stated the case for Robinson being the
P4P No1 even tho the majority of posters on this topic have voiced their opinions that Robinson is rightly No1 but rather than take it up now we will call a halt and agree that we are all entitled to our opinions and unlike Greatest1942 we wont slate one another off simply because our opinions differ.

For the record I was arguing that Langford would beat Robinson were they to meet, not necessarily that he was better in a p4p sense. I disagree that Robinson is the obvious #1 as Greb and Langford are both very close to him, if not ahead, although I accept Robinson is the majority view. But a good discussion nonetheless. Boxing debates would be very boring if we all agreed on everything