Should Langford?

[mcvey]

Should Sam Langford be considered an ATG at LHVY?
If so, how does he do against.

Spinks
Tunney
Charles
Moore
Foster

??????

[PowerPuncher]

Probably but if so Patterson should also

[mattdonnellon]

He didn't really operate at lightheavy weight and seemed to fly through the weight class on to heavyweight. The other guys also operated at heavyweight and I could see Sam beating the lot of them.

[mcvey]

He didn't really operate at lightheavy weight and seemed to fly through the weight class on to heavyweight. The other guys also operated at heavyweight and I could see Sam beating the lot of them.

Do you think he would have made a" non pareil" legacy at 175lbs?

[janitor]

He didn't really operate at lightheavy weight and seemed to fly through the weight class on to heavyweight.

That is partly because the light heavyweight division was not verry highly regarded back then.

If the question is "who was the best fighter under 175 lbs that ever was" then the answer is probably Sam Langford.

[mattdonnellon]

Do any of ye know when Sam outgrew 175?

[janitor]

Do any of ye know when Sam outgrew 175?

If he had chosen to make a career at that weight he could probably have made it for a long time.

[mcvey]

If he had chosen to make a career at that weight he could probably have made it for a long time.

I think you are probably right ,Sam went after the money,which was not in the lightly regarded Lhvy division,eg Burns did not even bother to claim the title when he beat O Brien ,though both were inside the limit.
Sam had huge shoulders and arms ,but his legs were not that big,certainly not as chunky as Burns' who played high level lacrosse.
I tend to think a 5 ' 7' Langford was carrying surplus ,when he campaigned at heavyweight.
How much more efficient would he have been at his optimum weight?
Possibly he would take the mantle that currently sits on Charles shoulders?

[My2Sense]

From what I've read about Langford, I've surmised that his ideal/natural weight was probably around super-middle. Personally, I've always rated him among the top 10, if not top 5 LHWs. However, of all the fighters listed, I would probably favor all except Foster to beat him, as I believe most of them were more well-rounded and versatile than Langford.

[dmt]

I rate him #2 on my atg light leavy list, just behind Charles. He looks good on the limited footage we have of him. But its very hard to judge him in head to head matchups because of the limited film available.

[Bummy Davis]

Spinks....Langford by UD
Tunney...Tunney by UD
Charles....Charles by UD
Moore.....Moore by UD
Foster....Langford by TKO

[techks]

Langford was a freak of nature. Anyone who moves from lightweight to heavyweight and still knocks people out really has incredible power.

[Mendoza]

Should Sam Langford be considered an ATG at LHVY?
If so, how does he do against.

Spinks
Tunney
Charles
Moore
Foster

??????

Yes. Langford had a rare mix of durability, power, skills, and speed. He could fight all night, and was too strong to be controlled in the clinches, and too determined to take the easy way out, even in a style disadvantage.

[WhataRock]

I have him top 10 there.