Excellent video. Very enjoyable. It has become very fashionable to look at Sam as a pound for pound great. Personally, I have him at three or four on my list. But Stanley was probably the most vicious fighter ever. Just an animal. I've read accounts of the fight and I do believe that both held back, only to pick spots to show what they could do. If Sam was REALLY holding back and could have dominated the fight, it was unlikely that Stanley would have promised him a title shot. And I remember what Sam said about him. I think that says a lot. I am not even going to try to pick a winner here. Sam had more true skill but Stanley was one of the very few fighters that could match his toughness and his punch. I REALLY wish this would have happened. By the way, at Ketchel's funeral, one of the people there said " start counting 10. He'll get up." This is a measure of what people believed of his ability to take punishment. Last thought, don't always trust boxrec. They are a good source but I have caught several mistakes. I think they sometimes find an account they like and run with it. Most of the accounts I have read of their fight called it a " dubious draw." I'll go with that.
Yup he ducked all the best black fighters of his era during his title reign. He also has a title defense against a journeyman named Battling Jim Johnson and almost lost fighting to a draw with him and then in Jim Johnsons very next fight he was knocked out by Langford with ease. Johnson is the most overrated champion in boxing history
Great video super interesting! Good content! You got me hooked 😂. Langford was an impressive man with an amazing story! He definitely got a bum deal because of the time he lived in.
I can recall on old boxing magazine of my fathers when was a kid of pictures of this legendary fight. The magazine was from the 1960''s or 1950's . The pictures looked as though they were taken from a film. I recall holes in the pictures like film has. I am certain, though I have no evidence to back this up, this fight was filmed.
@@andrewr62 I know that earlier issues of Boxing Illustrated (I think that October 1958 was their first issue) would put film “holes” along the edges of photos as kind of an embellishment or decoration. I’ll dig out some old copies and see If I can post them somewhere. This fight was almost certainly NOT filmed; I don’t even think photos exist.
Don't understand how Langford could be a natural middleweight. His weight for this bout according to the video was 178 lbs, which was in the heavyweight category at that time. In a fight with Joe Jeannette also on RUclips his weight is noted as in the high 180 lb range. That's the same as Marciano. It seems that these kind of mixed weight matches, though common then, would simply not have been sanctioned in later decades, when boxing was more strictly organised.
Fighters would commonly agree beforehand to carry the fight in order to sell it later. Was less money in a lopsided victory. Also, as a black boxer, Langford would have been wise to carry it into later rounds before going for a ko
Ketchel got a title fight with Jack Johnson. Langford didn't. Langford knew he could not get a title fight with champion Ketchel if he beat the crap out of Ketchel. Remember reporters referred to Sam as "Tar Baby" and favoured the white guy.
Remember reading an account where Langford knocked Stan senseless with a punch early on, then cradled him to the end of the round then carried him for the rest of the fight.
If the existing films of Ketchel vs Papke and Johnson are any indication, it would seem that Ketchel was more legend than legendary. Remember, this was a time before film was ubiquitous. Even still photos of fights was in its infancy. Hype for fights was written by the same men who reported on the fights and most of the time those same men worked as publicity men FOR the fighters involved in the match. Other than the 10 thousand or so who personally witnessed the match, the rest of the public had to go by what the newspapers reported and those reports could be blatantly biased or sensationalized. One day I will dig out a one-shot magazine published in the late 70s-early 80s that explained why most of what the “experts” wrote about the “legendary” fighters of the first two decades of the 20th century was blatant hype and present what I can of the text. It’s very illuminating.
Check out E.T.'s other channel: ruclips.net/video/8KXaY4Do_nM/видео.html
Great video for an almost unknow match between two great fighters. Thank you from Italy
Excellent video. Very enjoyable.
It has become very fashionable to look at Sam as a pound for pound great. Personally, I have him at three or four on my list. But Stanley was probably the most vicious fighter ever. Just an animal. I've read accounts of the fight and I do believe that both held back, only to pick spots to show what they could do. If Sam was REALLY holding back and could have dominated the fight, it was unlikely that Stanley would have promised him a title shot. And I remember what Sam said about him. I think that says a lot.
I am not even going to try to pick a winner here. Sam had more true skill but Stanley was one of the very few fighters that could match his toughness and his punch. I REALLY wish this would have happened. By the way, at Ketchel's funeral, one of the people there said " start counting 10. He'll get up." This is a measure of what people believed of his ability to take punishment.
Last thought, don't always trust boxrec. They are a good source but I have caught several mistakes. I think they sometimes find an account they like and run with it. Most of the accounts I have read of their fight called it a " dubious draw." I'll go with that.
Full of errors
@@Bruins-vq5ey Name one?
@@constantine7382 ketchel 5'9 not 5'7
@@constantine7382 the video...not your post
@@Bruins-vq5ey Sorry about that. You're right, I just checked the record book and he was 5'9". Good call.
And another great video, I love them. I'm so glad I came across your channel.
Thank you, Matthew!!
Both of those guys were animals in the ring. I remember Jack Johnson fighting Sam Langford once and not wanting to fight him again.
Yup he ducked all the best black fighters of his era during his title reign. He also has a title defense against a journeyman named Battling Jim Johnson and almost lost fighting to a draw with him and then in Jim Johnsons very next fight he was knocked out by Langford with ease. Johnson is the most overrated champion in boxing history
Great video super interesting! Good content! You got me hooked 😂. Langford was an impressive man with an amazing story! He definitely got a bum deal because of the time he lived in.
Interesting stuff. any chance of some Bob Fitzsimmons facts?
Yes, hopefully in a few weeks.
I can recall on old boxing magazine of my fathers when was a kid of pictures of this legendary fight. The magazine was from the 1960''s or 1950's . The pictures looked as though they were taken from a film. I recall holes in the pictures like film has. I am certain, though I have no evidence to back this up, this fight was filmed.
You may be referring to Langford's filmed encounter with Fireman Jim Flynn.
@@andrewr62 I know that earlier issues of Boxing Illustrated (I think that October 1958 was their first issue) would put film “holes” along the edges of photos as kind of an embellishment or decoration. I’ll dig out some old copies and see If I can post them somewhere. This fight was almost certainly NOT filmed; I don’t even think photos exist.
@@carspiv Could be. Interesting they added film holes to photos. Wish I still had those old boxing magazines.
I used to have Strat-o-matic boxing. Sam Langford was a beast.
Try Title Bout 2.5
Don't understand how Langford could be a natural middleweight. His weight for this bout according to the video was 178 lbs, which was in the heavyweight category at that time. In a fight with Joe Jeannette also on RUclips his weight is noted as in the high 180 lb range. That's the same as Marciano. It seems that these kind of mixed weight matches, though common then, would simply not have been sanctioned in later decades, when boxing was more strictly organised.
Contracted weight was 165
Fighters would commonly agree beforehand to carry the fight in order to sell it later. Was less money in a lopsided victory. Also, as a black boxer, Langford would have been wise to carry it into later rounds before going for a ko
A new video!
Ketchel è il mito della boxe il pioniere della boxe moderna la boxe è KETCHEL il più grande guerriero del ring nell'olimpo
Grazie. credo che tu abbia ragione!
Ketchel got a title fight with Jack Johnson. Langford didn't. Langford knew he could not get a title fight with champion Ketchel if he beat the crap out of Ketchel. Remember reporters referred to Sam as "Tar Baby" and favoured the white guy.
Remember reading an account where Langford knocked Stan senseless with a punch early on, then cradled him to the end of the round then carried him for the rest of the fight.
Wasn't sam Langford the greatest boxer of all time. I think so. The goat of boxing.
Hell yeah, Sam Langford was the greatest even jack Johnson, and Jack Dempsey wanted to fight him.
If the existing films of Ketchel vs Papke and Johnson are any indication, it would seem that Ketchel was more legend than legendary. Remember, this was a time before film was ubiquitous. Even still photos of fights was in its infancy. Hype for fights was written by the same men who reported on the fights and most of the time those same men worked as publicity men FOR the fighters involved in the match. Other than the 10 thousand or so who personally witnessed the match, the rest of the public had to go by what the newspapers reported and those reports could be blatantly biased or sensationalized.
One day I will dig out a one-shot magazine published in the late 70s-early 80s that explained why most of what the “experts” wrote about the “legendary” fighters of the first two decades of the 20th century was blatant hype and present what I can of the text. It’s very illuminating.
Dr. Leroy Ashby's book (Entertainment for All) does a great job covering the hyping of various entertainment forms, including boxing,
Kiecal was 5'9
Wacko
@@Bruins-vq5ey Ray and his era compared to the average 70s fighter on my page
@@ascendediamwrong video
@@Bruins-vq5ey seek help
@@Bruins-vq5ey lunatic