Greb, Langford, p4p and lack of film

[Greatest1942]

I agree that Sam's prime weight was around 180-185 and perhaps 190. He was out of shape at 200lbs. I don't know where the idea that Langford's best weight was 160, the man himself certainly disagreed.

Yep, if you see his heavy fights I have seen that his best results are when he weighed 175-180 pounds...Stats prove it...and anyways for a guy his height 200 pounds is stretching it, in that era.

[McGrain]

Yep, if you see his heavy fights I have seen that his best results are when he weighed 175-180 pounds...Stats prove it...and anyways for a guy his height 200 pounds is stretching it, in that era.

In any era! Carrying 200lbs at 5'6 is tough even for a man of his extraordinary build.

[Greatest1942]

In any era! Carrying 200lbs at 5'6 is tough even for a man of his extraordinary build.

I purposefully wrote that so that someone does not bring up Toney again regardless of the fact that he is taller and still when over 200 lbs looks way out of shape

[Greatest1942]

In any era! Carrying 200lbs at 5'6 is tough even for a man of his extraordinary build.

The fact that he was undertrained can be derived from this quote of his and you don't need to be a Einestein to understand it

Around 1914-195 Sam said, "It was along about then that I became sure that no matter how good I became I'd never be a world's heavyweight champion because the doors were closed. Up to that time I had trained rather seriously for practically all my fights. But I got disgusted and said 'what's the use of training, I ain't going anywhere in particular,' and I wasn't.

I wanted to go alright, but those white boys wouldn't let me. I had reached thirty years of age, and when a fellow is thirty, he isn't willing to train as when he is younger. So got nice and fat, and I never did get my figure back."

Way before the 200lb Sam appeared before Fulton

[Greatest1942]

"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

"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

[Greatest1942]

"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

"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

These people actually saw him fight or fought him and these endorsements are not that easy to come by.

[Scott9945]

It needs to be considered that there is very little footage of Robinson in his absolute prime at welterweight. It might blow away any footage of Langford or Greb if there was.

[Greatest1942]

It needs to be considered that there is very little footage of Robinson in his absolute prime at welterweight. It might blow away any footage of Langford or Greb if there was.

While you are right about this point, I would like to state that there are some boxers who although might not look so effective will be great. Burley didn't look great in film but he was mighty effective and was ducked like the plague. In footage many don't see the greatness, but wasn't he good? Even if you see how good he was he will never look as good as Sugar Ray.

Besides Robinson never fought guys giving 40-50 pounds to them or never fought light heavy's or heavy's as middleweight.

I sincerely believe Sam beat more ATG's at different weights than Robinson did and if there was more footage of him it would have been great. Same with Greb, beating Tunney while giving up height, weight , reach is not a mean thing. Greb beat heavy weights while weighing as middle.

[Greatest1942]

The fact that he was undertrained can be derived from this quote of his and you don't need to be a Einestein to understand it

Around 1914-195 Sam said, "It was along about then that I became sure that no matter how good I became I'd never be a world's heavyweight champion because the doors were closed. Up to that time I had trained rather seriously for practically all my fights. But I got disgusted and said 'what's the use of training, I ain't going anywhere in particular,' and I wasn't.

I wanted to go alright, but those white boys wouldn't let me. I had reached thirty years of age, and when a fellow is thirty, he isn't willing to train as when he is younger. So got nice and fat, and I never did get my figure back."

Way before the 200lb Sam appeared before Fulton

And if Sam has retired during that time his carrer he would not probably had all those losses. In his prime from he was rarely beaten and avanged them each of the time.

to make matters in perspective there was a period from late 1906 through to October of 1914 where he lost only two of 87 fights.

[BennyST]

The resumes of Harry Greb and Sam Langford are very comparable to that of the great Sugar Ray Robinson. It seems they are hurt though by the lack of footage or no footage at all. If there were quality film on both these fighters and they were as dominant on it as they are on paper is it concievable one of them could surpass Ray as the mythical greatest p4p fighter of all time?

Yes, it is likely or possible. Obviously the resumes of both these guys is incredible. Second to none literally as they both have HOFer after HOFer on them, just like Robinson.

So, yes, it's very possible that if there were film and we saw them beating these other greats that they could be considered better. In fact, of course it's likely. Why wouldn't it be for those that think it isn't? Their resumes are arguably equal or better but we don't have the film to show them in fights against other greats. If there were and they were just as dominant as Robinson, why is it not possible?

Nothing is set in stone and it's not a given that we just rate Robinson as the very best without any thought or consideration. The two above have resumes that do equal Robinson's and even arguably surpass it. However, we have enough film of Robinson beating other ATG's that we can see how dominant and great he was therefore it's much easier to say that he was the best.

If we did have a lot of film of the others, we could have seen that maybe they were as great or greater in their dominance of those ATG's and we could compare them much easier. As it is, the resumes of both certainly tell us that they belong up the very top of boxings best without doubt.

The one certainty in boxing and of ranking a fighter is that of his wins against other great fighters. The skill shown by a fighter in general much less so as it can always vary so greatly when facing great competition or certain styles etc etc. The one way to tell a fighters true skill level and greatness is in who he beat. These three are probably above everyone else when it comes to their wins against other greats. We have good film of only one.

It is always easy to look at a fighter of what looks to be incredible skill level and say they could have been the very best or that they are better than fighter A, B and C. However, it still comes down to speculation based on attributes that we assume would be shown in every fight against every fighter without regard to style or an opponents level of greatness. If a fighter has proven that they can beat all styles and levels of fighter by doing it in the ring, then we know for a certainty how they compete against everyone. It's the one definitive way of answering questions about them.

For example; If we had seen Pacquiao fight everyone he has except Marquez and Morales, we would not know that he has great trouble against someone who can time him and counter his aggression. It would be easy to say that he could have beaten them without trouble. But, he did fight them and we saw that he struggles and can be beaten by that style.

Take the other great fighter Mayweather; we haven't seen him against a great fighter in the style of a Ray Leonard or something. Someone quick, skilled, with the ability to box and keep someone at bay with a stiff jab and quick flurries of power. As his most ardent fans repeat constantly, he could beat that style easily with his quick counters and defence, therefore it should be attributed to him that he could beat someone like that. Do we know though? Has he actually done it? No. He hasn't. If he hadn't fought Castillo, we would also have assumed that he would never have struggled at all. In fact, we would have said that he would have made Castillo look like a slow plodding hack.

We could also have easily assumed that Zab Judah could have been an ATG if he stopped fighting just before going up against Tszyu for whatever reason. He had shown what appeared to be skill, speed, power, determination, will, and stamina of the highest caliber. It would have been easy to assume he would have shown those same skills against everyone of all levels and styles, if we didn't see it all crumble when faced with a highly determined will.

The one factor that puts all argument to rest (nearly all anyway) is when a fighter has definitively shown his skills against other greats of all styles and won. It's the single way to tell how great a fighter really is. These three (Robinson, Greb and Langford) have done so. The one thing we can likely assume is that because of the definitive wins they had incredible skill that could possibly be seen as greater than Robinson's based on those wins.

Of course, just looking good on film is always different again to being an effective fighter. Robinson may have always looked better on film. Looking better doesn't mean being better though. A guy who looks like **** fighting and you don't think he could beat everyone but beats a million ATG's has to be rated up there. Again, it comes down to a guys wins. Even if he doesn't look a world beater but is able to beat all these greats, you cannot deny his skill and fighting effectiveness.