Sam Langford = not an ATG!

[dan_cov]

Following on basically from how these so called old-timers are said to be the dogs boll0cks.

I'd like a ''historian'' to debate rather than the usual ''troll'' or ''you know nothing'' because though many won't say it, I can guarantee they can see where the hell I am coming from.

I hear all this well absolute bull**** spewed day in, day out about Sam Langford (will be using him as an example) being one of the greatest ever, one of the very best heavyweights to ever live! A top 5/10 P4P and all this. WTF are you basing this off?

The guy had 300+ fights, 280+ of which was absolute bums! P/T fighters that was damn lightweights! Circus acts LITERALLY! Guys that had never even trained was paid at ringside & would beat him FFS!
He lost 40+ of these & 50 odd was given as draws.
50 odd was draws - This tells you something is up.
Arguably the guy lost around a 100 fights.
QUALITY >>> QUANTITY.

The guy was NEVER a world champion!

He was knocked silly by the likes of Harry Wills, several times, I cba to boxrec, was it 8 losses, 2 draws & a gift decision he had against Wills?

The Boston crybaby Sam Langford in his prime was getting knocked out left, right & center against 5-6 fight novices LOL

If Sam Langford was around today with all due respect he would be about as highly regarded as Eric Crumble. You laugh but that is a diss to Crumble as Langford wouldn't even get a job as a sparring partner let alone a pro license.

Lets take a look at his skillset! THE greatest HW ever right here...
Like two drunk mates having a play fight!



Throws an over hand right & falls off balance into opponent where they spend about a week ''clinching''

Honestly the only people trolling are the coffin dodgers who like to spend copious hours trying to convince themselves & others this guy was amazing in all aspects of boxing when reality is its clear as day, he was no better in the ring than your local neighborhood milkman.

[IronDanHamza]

Following on basically from how these so called old-timers are said to be the dogs boll0cks.

I'd like a ''historian'' to debate rather than the usual ''troll'' or ''you know nothing'' because though many won't say it, I can guarantee they can see where the hell I am coming from.

I hear all this well absolute bull**** spewed day in, day out about Sam Langford (will be using him as an example) being one of the greatest ever, one of the very best heavyweights to ever live! A top 5/10 P4P and all this. WTF are you basing this off?

The guy had 300+ fights, 280+ of which was absolute bums! P/T fighters that was damn lightweights! Circus acts LITERALLY! Guys that had never even trained was paid at ringside & would beat him FFS!
He lost 40+ of these & 50 odd was given as draws.
50 odd was draws - This tells you something is up.
Arguably the guy lost around a 100 fights.
QUALITY >>> QUANTITY.

The guy was NEVER a world champion!

He was knocked silly by the likes of Harry Wills, several times, I cba to boxrec, was it 8 losses, 2 draws & a gift decision he had against Wills?

The Boston crybaby Sam Langford in his prime was getting knocked out left, right & center against 5-6 fight novices LOL

If Sam Langford was around today with all due respect he would be about as highly regarded as Eric Crumble. You laugh but that is a diss to Crumble as Langford wouldn't even get a job as a sparring partner let alone a pro license.

Lets take a look at his skillset! THE greatest HW ever right here...
Like two drunk mates having a play fight!



Throws an over hand right & falls off balance into opponent where they spend about a week ''clinching''

Honestly the only people trolling are the coffin dodgers who like to spend copious hours trying to convince themselves & others this guy was amazing in all aspects of boxing when reality is its clear as day, he was no better in the ring than your local neighborhood milkman.

By 'the likes of Harry Willis' you're acting like he isn't a Top 15 ATG HW.

And I don't think anyone considers Sam Langford to be one of the greatest HW's to ever live. You know he's not a Natural HW, right?

Langford beat one of the greatest Lightweight's ever Joe Gans 5 lbs north if 135 and also beat a Top 15 HW at HW.

If that's not ATG material then I'm not sure what is.

And, you're right about him not winning a title. Well, an official title. But, of course, that wasn't his fault. The colour line was well in effect then and when Jack Johnson got the title, he refused to rematch Langford.

[dan_cov]

By 'the likes of Harry Willis' you're acting like he isn't a Top 15 ATG HW.

And I don't think anyone considers Sam Langford to be one of the greatest HW's to ever live. You know he's not a Natural HW, right?

Langford beat one of the greatest Lightweight's ever Joe Gans 5 lbs north if 135 and also beat a Top 15 HW at HW.

If that's not ATG material then I'm not sure what is.

And, you're right about him not winning a title. Well, an official title. But, of course, that wasn't his fault. The colour line was well in effect then and when Jack Johnson got the title, he refused to rematch Langford.

That he did! Though I think Gans best days was behind him, I can't grumble he beat the man and a real, 110% legit ATG (One I'd have no problem with being placed in any top 10 list)
I think though his win over Gans who was still very impressive was probably about as meaningful as Leon Spinks win over Ali

I'll have a gorp in my book later as I do recall reading something about that fight & ''Langford overshadowing Gans by 15-20lbs'' or something along those lines.

Its a brilliant book actually if you don't have it I really would thoroughly recommend it its called Unseen archives Boxing!
Its around 400 pages, full of photos, stats & articles of just about every ATG from the 1880's to the late 90s early 00s.
Very cheap too, only maybe £5/$10

[SCtrojansbaby]

Holy cow that video is awful

[LeG00N]

I could probably step into the ring with Sam Langford and knock his ass out....

[boliodogs]

He is very overrated in my opinion. In his day fighters were payed very little so there was not much reason to be a pro boxer. A good fighter could almost make more money being a rich man's body guard than he could fighting. These old timers often bet on themselves because their purse was so small. The low pay did not attract talent. He fought the same guys over and over again as many as 15 times and he had lots of KO losses as you said. That video clearly shows he was not so great and they clinched more than John Ruiz on his worst day.

[1g5a22]

Don't listen to whole thing about him being the "greatest fighter to never hold a world HW title." The guy was 5'6" and weighed like what? 150? how's that a heavyweight?

Interesting tit bit for ya... Out of Sam Langford's many wins, 116of those wins were against opponents who had 9 WINS OR LESS LOL!

Imagine if a fighter today built a winning record by having well over 50% of their matches with boxers who have so few wins under their belt (basically inexperienced newbies and/or tomato cans)? Doesn't that tell you anything?

Greb was a much greater fighter.

Greb beat 18 men who are in the IBHOF. He dominated the middleweight and light heavyweight divisions. Only man to beat Tunney... and he did much of his best work with one working eye.

[1g5a22]

On the up side Sam Langford said Jack Dempsey was the greatest fighter he had ever seen.. when asked who he thought would win between Jack Dempsey v Harry Wills he replied...

Sam Langford, when asked how Harry Wills (whom he fought 18 times in his career) would do against Jack Dempsey, said in the June 5, 1922, Atlanta Constitution "Well if he ever fights Dempsey my money will be on the present champion. Dempsey is the greatest fighter I have ever seen. He hits twice as hard as Jim Jeffries and is as fast in the ring as James J. Corbett."

[TheGreatA]

Anybody can make the case that a boxer is a bum. This takes no particular skill in anything other than calling men a hundred times tougher than you "bums".

It's far more difficult to back up your statements with cold, hard facts and this has not been done here. Give it more of an effort and you might evoke someone's interest.

Let's put it this way, Sam Langford from 1907 to 1913, his physical prime, lost only once, while winning around 50 contests. Nobody with a clue truly cares about whether a near-blind, 40 year old Langford lost fights at the end of a career against heavyweights. He fought from lightweight up to heavyweight, and fought and beat recognized world champions in each of those divisions.

He was pretty good.

[IronDanHamza]

That he did! Though I think Gans best days was behind him, I can't grumble he beat the man and a real, 110% legit ATG (One I'd have no problem with being placed in any top 10 list)
I think though his win over Gans who was still very impressive was probably about as meaningful as Leon Spinks win over Ali

I really don't see the comparison.

Gans may not have been at his peak but he still was one of the best fighters in the world. Went on to have very good wins and a Title reign.

I really can't see how that compares to the Spinks-Ali situation.

I'll have a gorp in my book later as I do recall reading something about that fight & ''Langford overshadowing Gans by 15-20lbs'' or something along those lines.

I'm almost certain he was not outweighed by 20 Lbs.

Gans weighed at the Lightweight limit, there or there abouts and Langford came in the ring at 140 Lbs. I believe the fight was sceduled at the limit of 140 Lbs.

Its a brilliant book actually if you don't have it I really would thoroughly recommend it its called Unseen archives Boxing!
Its around 400 pages, full of photos, stats & articles of just about every ATG from the 1880's to the late 90s early 00s.
Very cheap too, only maybe £5/$10

I think I recall the book you're referring to. I'll have to have a look and get that if I haven't read it already.

And, I think you're being really harsh on Sam Langford here.

I mean, like I said, the guy beat Joe Gans at the Jr Welterweight limit and went on to beat a Top 15 ATG HW.

That itself speaks volumes. Doesn't it?

Let's not forget he beat Stanley Ketchel at MW and fought to a draw with Joe Walcott at WW in between. Some claim that Langford deserved that decision aswell.

Add his mutliple wins over Jeanette, Mcvey and Willis ontop of that.

Many consider Jeanette and Mcvery to be two of the best wins on Jack Johnson's resume.

I think it's clear as day that he's an obvious ATG.