Jack Dempsey or Sam Langford who do you rate as the greater fighter?

[The_Demon]

some ****in amazing comments here.. Dempsey would have knocked him out within 2rds and those who have said Langford would beat him are talking a load os bull, Jack Dempsey is one of the greatest and most famous fighters who ever lived.. what the **** is Langfords claim to fame

Once again you prove how much of an idiot you are

Langford > Dempsey

[TheDreamer]

Langford is a cut above Dempsey.

Also I have heard that Dempsey admitted that he was afraid of Langford and that Sam would beat him.

Correct.

In his autobiography, Dempsey admitted that he declined an offer to fight Langford in 1916. Dempsey was 21-years-old, at the time, while Langford was 33 and going blind.

Here's what Dempsey wrote:

"The Hell I feared no man. There was one man, he was even smaller than I, and I wouldn’t fight because I knew he would flatten me. I was afraid of Sam Langford."

[sonnyboyx2]

At heavyweight, I'd fancy Dempsey to KO Langford, but Sam has one of the best resumes in boxing:-

Joe Gans, Jack Blackburn, Kid Williams, William Hague, Stanley Ketchell, Dave Holly, Tut Jackson, Tiger Flowers, Kid Norfolk, George Godfrey (2), Bill Tate (3), Jeff Clarke (2), Young Peter Jackson (3), Dixie Kidd (2), Phily Jack O'Brien, Gun Boat Smith, Harry Wills (2), Sam McVey (7), Joe Jeannette (7), Fireman Jim Flynn (4)

The above are all wins.. He also had draws and defeats to some of them, but only HW Harry Wills had the better of Langford overall..

Dempsey on the other hand, lacks a bit of depth in his resume.. It could do with a few of the above or a win over a good ATG like Harry Greb.. Between 1918 and 1923 they fought at least 8 common opponents, some on more than one occasion, so in some ways i'm surprised a match between Greb and Dempsey never materialized?..

As for an answer to the question; Langford accomplished more in the ring, so should be placed higher than Dempsey on an ATG list, but at HW Langford should be lower and tbh would be lucky to make my top 20 HW's, as would Dempsey be just as lucky to
make my top 20 ATG's..

Godfrey, Tate & Larry Gaines who were the 2nd 3rd & 4th best colored fighters of their era was often used as sparring partners by Dempsey and they was nothing more than dog-meat to him, they was destroyed on a regular basis, Harry Wills who was not much better than those 3 fighters, Dempsey was just so much better than any other fighter of the day that no one particularly cared against whom he defended. Though Wills unquestionably deserved a shot at the title, he wouldn't have lasted 5 rounds.

[T.Horton]

i am still not even convinced that the 190lb Dempsey would have his way with the 165lb Langford - a man who consistently fought men above 210lbs including going (for all intent and purposes) even up with one of the best heavyweights ever (Jack Johnson)

I wouldn't say that I am biased against Dempsey but I don't see him with the same rose coloured glasses that some do. The colour barrier thing irks me. And yeah Johnson adhered to it while he was Champ but he certainly fought everybody that there was to fight before he was champion. I'm babbling. Dempsey's talent pool was far too shallow and he fought too few times for me to rate him as a great. An exciting fighter with brutal power who I would rate alongside somebody like Earnie Shavers or Ken Norton but based on Langford's resume, even at heavyweight, I would have to pick him.

I just re-read this and man, what a mess. lol

[T.Horton]

Godfrey, Tate & Larry Gaines who were the 2nd 3rd & 4th best colored fighters of their era was often used as sparring partners by Dempsey and they was nothing more than dog-meat to him, they was destroyed on a regular basis, Harry Wills who was not much better than those 3 fighters, Dempsey was just so much better than any other fighter of the day that no one particularly cared against whom he defended. Though Wills unquestionably deserved a shot at the title, he wouldn't have lasted 5 rounds.

You are wrong about Larry Gaines, he was never 'dogmeat'. Further, you're talking about friggin' sparring. Some guys go all out in sparring and try to hurt their partners ie: Chuvalo, Marciano, Foreman, Liston, and DEMPSEY, especially when the camera's were on. How does sparring prove anything?

[T.Horton]

Once again you prove how much of an idiot you are

Langford > Dempsey

straight up. I usually try to stay neutral in these arguments but this kid is annoying.

[TheDreamer]

Godfrey, Tate & Larry Gaines who were the 2nd 3rd & 4th best colored fighters of their era was often used as sparring partners by Dempsey and they was nothing more than dog-meat to him, they was destroyed on a regular basis, Harry Wills who was not much better than those 3 fighters, Dempsey was just so much better than any other fighter of the day that no one particularly cared against whom he defended. Though Wills unquestionably deserved a shot at the title, he wouldn't have lasted 5 rounds.

Uhh.. there's a difference between being a sparring partner and being an opponent in a professional fight.

By the way, wins aren't issued by fantasy match-ups in someone's head.

[sonnyboyx2]

straight up. I usually try to stay neutral in these arguments but this kid is annoying.

you are the one who is annoying with your ****** comments and complete lack of knowledge of the sport in the early part of the century

[Southpaw Great]

you are the one who is annoying with your ****** comments and complete lack of knowledge of the sport in the early part of the century

But if you have followed the sport for so long, how can you say ''what the **** is Langfords claim to fame''

[TheGreatA]

Langford was an absolute legend who fought world champions from lightweight up to heavyweight, unparalleled in boxing history.

There was also a lot of interest in a Wills vs Dempsey bout, enough for New York to ban Dempsey for a while due to not fighting Wills, his number 1 contender.

You're a good poster most of the time but I think you're in the wrong here.