Is Sam Langford the greatest fighter never to win a world title?

[SBleeder]

Burley is definitely 13th and Langford is absolutely certainly 8th. You know some people say Shumenov is the 872nd greatest light-heavyweight but they are way out on that, Shumenov is definitely, and everyone with knowledge knows this, the 871st greatest light-heavyweight. Now don't get me started on know is the 1745th greatest lightweight.....

I recently made a list of the 1829 greatest light heavyweights of all time and placed Bernard Hopkins at #1745.

[Holywarrior]

Burley is definitely 13th and Langford is absolutely certainly 8th. You know some people say Shumenov is the 872nd greatest light-heavyweight but they are way out on that, Shumenov is definitely, and everyone with knowledge knows this, the 871st greatest light-heavyweight. Now don't get me started on know is the 1745th greatest lightweight.....

I know it's splitting hairs. But you have to when you reach the top 30 guys.

[joeandthebums]

I know it's splitting hairs. But you have to when you reach the top 30 guys.

Never really sat down and done a list, but as you rated your top 30, where did Jack Blackburn slot in - if at all?

Cheers

[Humean]

I know it's splitting hairs. But you have to when you reach the top 30 guys.

Well you don't have to rank them in order at all, you could say "these are the greats" without placing them in any particular order. But more than that where you rank fighters revolves upon what criteria you use and very different criteria can produce very different lists. I think it is very likely that Burley would have defeated Langford should they have ever fought, if that is a reasonable view then why couldn't Burley rank higher than Langford? Maybe it is absurd to even think about such hypothetical match ups between fighters from different eras, and maybe even if Burley would have defeated Langford that this is not important to their respective greatness. What is surely the case is that there is nothing even close to being an authoritative ranking of great fighters.

I'm not even sure what the criteria is that clearly makes Burley a great fighter.

[Holywarrior]

Never really sat down and done a list, but as you rated your top 30, where did Jack Blackburn slot in - if at all?

Cheers

Eh?? Top 30 ever ? Not close, not top 100 even. He is a Sumbu Kalambay type that had it but never garnered what he should've

[Holywarrior]

I'm not even sure what the criteria is that clearly makes Burley a great fighter.

Huh? Really....?

[Humean]

Huh? Really....?

He has no career accomplishments in terms of titles except the "colored" welterweight title and never unfortunately fought for the 'world' title at either welterweight or middleweight. He did defeat some strong welterweight/middleweight contenders of his day, but so did many others that nobody ever calls great plus he lost a fair few too. He did defeat a champion like Zivic but that is nothing to shout about, plenty others defeated Zivic too. He fought at a time when the sport was pretty provincial, made worse by having a number of his prime years occuring during the course of the Second World War. Did he ever fight a non-North American? His cultural/social significant is practically zero, he was not well known in his day and was not well liked by the fans. There is no doubt he was one of the unluckiest fighters in history but he cannot be considered great based upon sympathy.

So what makes him truly great? Very good no doubt but for him to be considered great is a real stretch.

[Holywarrior]

He has no career accomplishments in terms of titles except the "colored" welterweight title and never unfortunately fought for the 'world' title at either welterweight or middleweight. He did defeat some strong welterweight/middleweight contenders of his day, but so did many others that nobody ever calls great plus he lost a fair few too. He did defeat a champion like Zivic but that is nothing to shout about, plenty others defeated Zivic too. He fought at a time when the sport was pretty provincial, made worse by having a number of his prime years occuring during the course of the Second World War. Did he ever fight a non-North American? His cultural/social significant is practically zero, he was not well known in his day and was not well liked by the fans. There is no doubt he was one of the unluckiest fighters in history but he cannot be considered great based upon sympathy.

So what makes him truly great? Very good no doubt but for him to be considered great is a real stretch.

God sakes. No wonder the history forum is dead.

[Humean]

God sakes. No wonder the history forum is dead.

Great argument, stellar marks.

[Holywarrior]

Great argument, stellar marks.

i stopped reading at "he has no career accomplishments"