Bless you, K-Dogg.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Sam Langford vs. Roy Jones JR
Collapse
-
Originally posted by brownpimp88 View PostTell me how sam langford vs michael spinks would play out.
IMO, it could go either way, really. To me, it's a toss up. Not trying to cop-out, it's just really hard for me to see who would win that one. I think it would be a nightmare to score; but I'd say it would go one of two ways. Spinks would either win a decision or Langford would stop him late.
Comment
-
Originally posted by K-DOGG View PostActually, from a style-perspective, I would give Spinks a slight edge because of his unorthodoxy; but he would have a hard time with Langford too. Especially since we know that Langford had the power to knock out heavyweights of his era and held his own with top Black heavyweights of the day, beating most, if not all.
IMO, it could go either way, really. To me, it's a toss up. Not trying to cop-out, it's just really hard for me to see who would win that one. I think it would be a nightmare to score; but I'd say it would go one of two ways. Spinks would either win a decision or Langford would stop him late.
You say holyfield was indeed beaten by the best. Let's take a look at archie's record against the best. You will be amazed how many times he came up 'short'.
Comment
-
Langford was a Langford and there is not else much to say
Honestly I think that when thinking of Jones' chin, one should remember the amount of punches tarver landed in their first fight and ask himsels some more questions.
I think if they fought with modern rules jones would win.
I think if they fought with the 1910s rules, Langford would win.
some people are too quick in discounting Jones chances, and just as many if not more discount alltimers' chances like nothing
to me they were both great fighters, and masters at their art in their era. different eras and different arts.
If they were both trained and developed in the same era, I would give the edge to Langford, but I am implicitly assuming that Jones would not benefit from fighting often as much as Langford would benefit from modern training. An assumption which I am nt sure is correct at all.
Comment
-
Originally posted by brownpimp88 View PostThe main posters on the 'other' forum are actually admitting that spinks would beat them all head to head, except ezzard. They say he is clearly superior to archie.
You say holyfield was indeed beaten by the best. Let's take a look at archie's record against the best. You will be amazed how many times he came up 'short'.
Comment
-
Originally posted by K-DOGG View PostWell, Archie started off at middleweight, too....and the talent pool at the time he fougth was immense. Sides, Holyfield was a heavyweight whereas Archie is a Light-Heavy. Apples and Oraanges, really....and Archie fought anyone, like Holyfield; but unlike Holy, he wasn't as big, even though Holy was "small" by today's standards.
Comment
Comment