The mythos surrounding Langford is some of the most fascinating to me. To be a man of such small stature so heavily avoided by the greatest fighters of the day is remarkable.
Nice vid ET, I'd heard Langfords name but didn't know anything about him, what an amazing fighter he was at that height and weight. Sad ending for a courageous man.
Fred Fulton was one of three "white hope" fighters during the reign of the great Jack Johnson. All three fighters were good fighters and crossed the "color line" when other white fighters would not. All three were "heavy hitters" and put many fighters to sleep in the ring. That said, the three best heavyweight fighters during Jack Johnson's championship years were black fighters. Sam Langford, Joe Jeanette, and Sam McVey. Jack had fought all three of these men "before" he was champion and won. Of course his wins were hard fought and close. Sam was very young when he fought Jack and was really not ready yet for a prime Jack Johnson. It was a close fight none the less and that was the only time Jack would meet Sam in the ring. Joe Jeanette fought Johnson several times "before" Jack took the crown from Tommy Burns. He would never meet the awesome Joe Jeanette after becoming champ. Sam McVey, the same. Tough fighters all, and much, much better than the competition Jack did face during his reign. The Black Pather, Harry Wills, would show up at the end of Jack's days as Champion of the World. Jack Johnson drew the "color line", not out of racism for his own race, but out of the real possibility one of these three greats would beat him, most likely Sam Langford. When Fred fought Sam Langford, he was in his prime whereas Sam's best day's were behind him, although he could still lick most of the fighters around at that time who were bold enough to meet the elderly battler. Sam could still put the best to sleep past his prime, he was just that great! Fulton was good but nowhere near Sam's class! A few years earlier and bye, bye Fred!
There were many wht fighters who crossed the color line. Put up the right money and there would have been many more. The 3 best were black fighters, lol. Just opinion. Jack J never gave a blk fighter a shot at the title, shame on him. Jack fought mostly smaller men who today would be lt heavies or middleweights. And when Jack met a guy his own size he got knocked cold. And Jess W was considered a mediocre fighter. The best fighters of the time is a loaded question. Because many blk fighters were not tested against the great whts of the time. John L thought Peter J was not worthy of a shot and a bush league fighter with few skills. The same could be said of Joe J, and Sam M. Their rep's were greatly exaggerated. And do not forget that fighters back then were promoted like carny acts were.
@@DHEMGHJS Fred was most certainly a fighter that Jack could have met after he lost the title to Willard in April 1914. He was climbing up the rankings and although Jack was living out of the country, he was still fighting during Fred's peak years. Put it this way, Fred would have had to meet Jack outside the country to fight him. As ex-champ , Jack would have been inclined to fight a top contender to get back in the inner circle of boxing again. Fred only had about 5 or 6 fights at the time Jack lost the title. In the next couple of years he fought often and fought the best. This would have been the time for the two to meet.
@@davidabney7700 Bottom line Fulton was not in the top 3 White Hopes during Johnson's reign which was what you stated.He wasnt even in the top10.And there were no ratings until1924.The leading Hopes were ,Smith,Moran.McCarty,Wells,Palzer, Ferguson,Kaufman , Pelkey, Flynn and Willard ,with Morris,Coffey,Bell etc bringing up the rear.During Johnson's reign Fulton met 2 top fighters Morris who beat him twice. and Palzer who ko'd him.Fulton did not become a factor in the heavyweight scene until after Willard became champion.
Not really seeing how anyone can say fullton was a bum or like hed have NO shot against sam younger. Dude was still a MENACE until AFTER he was blinded. Cant just give a guy credit? I know sam had it tough in life and everyone wants to defend him but to shit on this other guy like hes nothing is just stupid. He had a uniquely powerful right hand clearly since he went undefeated until Dempsey. Is a few years prior going to make Sam's skull harder? I dont think that's how it works. That particular shot would have done that same damage regardless of whether or not Langford was "in better shape" or not. Your optic nerves cant be conditioned in boxing. If that shit happens, it happens. Sam was an amazing boxer but even with the fact that both Jack's (dempsey and Johnson) were afraid of him, johnson did still beat him once, and i honestly still think Jack Johnson would have beaten him later too. Fear doesnt mean youd lose, and I think Dempseys extremely aggressive style wouldve been overwhelming for slower paced bare knuckle type boxers like sam or Johnson. They were quick, but dempsey changed the game in terms of technique in the same way sam and johnson changed it before.
Jack Dempsey respected Langford but had little to fear from Langford by 1919. Fulton destroyed the older Langford and give him an incredible beating by all accounts in 1917. Yet Dempsey need all of 18 seconds to KO Fulton in 1918. So does anybody who knows better really believe he had anything thing to fear from the aging blinding Sam Langford after July 4 1919? In the next few years Langford would lose a total of 11 fights some by KO losses. Did the aging Langford even deserve a title shot in when a fight with Dempsey was proposed and refused by Kearns in 1923? When Dempsey first refused a fight with Langford, Dempsey was a mere noice with a handful of fights. He was wise to refuse then. But at his peak with the Langford was near blind and perhaps 6-7 years past his best? Please.
@@IssacLemus-mk8bk My black boxers? Not sure exactly what you mean by that. Langford was 11 in 1917 and repeatedly losing to Harry Wills. Fair to say he was not at his peak. He was at his peak when Johnson was Champion and constantly ducking Langford. I do give credit to Fulton on this win which was the biggest win of his career. Just as I give credit to Dempsey for taking Fulton out in 18 seconds.
If he fought Sam even a yr earlier it would of went diffrent. Can't discredit his win against Sam but to beat a man at his worst is a show of weak confidence
One can't say that for sure. Truth is this was an incredibly one sided fight and Langford by all newspaper accounts took a horrific beating. Dempsey needed all of 18 seconds to KO Fulton a year later. One thing I feel very comfortable saying is that if Johnson had fought Langford during his title reign 1908-1915 the outcome out have been much different than when their 1906 fight when Langford was little more than I Welterweight.
much bigger much younger much heavier in his prime a guy who couldn't hold up the ring rope for sam a guy sam who have wiped put at any time unless coerced to carry him
This is so true!! The offspring of those great boxers of the 20s & 30s are now living in the suburbs and working on Wall Street ... no tough environs that produced tough guys.;
It's unfortunate that Fulton's 1st round ko loss to Dempsey is what boxing writers seem to remember of this powerful boxer. Prior to meeting Dempsey, Fulton had run up a string of impressive wins. Many of his losses were, in fact, disqualifications, and an early ko loss to Al Palzer was a fluke.
They just gotta mention who blinded him! Basically a "BUM" he would have knocked cold in his prime! Imagine how many people jumped on the opportunity to beat up on him, when he started getting old...Just to get some kind of glory off of his legacy...boy some people!
Before Joe Frazier and the many other post-1930s Pennsylvania boxers, Philadelphia fight fans had the then famous Gunboat Smith. Its his picture that appears with the Pa. flag.
I guess the english term for this is "Free Will"(maybe not) the thing that God gave to humans to be/do whatever the fuck they won't... and if he is God, He knew that at some point we would do that for fun, challenge, sport and even for pure evil(not the case for most of us). I really can't see the problem when people know the risks and still want to do it, against someone who also accept it.
The commentator has some opinions that are not shared by many. On one hand he praises SL for being so great, and then says Fulton was pretty much so so. Yet Fulton beat SL. There is no doubt about fighters of the era being tough men. However, SL reputation is greatly exaggerated. How so? Fighting records of the time are far from reality. In trying to check many fighters there is too much speculation and not enough fact. Records are shady at best; SL record varies from losing 50% percent of his matches to 40 and 35%. Which one is correct? We will never know. From my perspective SL was a good fighter. With all his losses how could he be considered as one of the greats? Not in my book. And so many black fighters are looked at not for their boxing skills, but as being brave men for breaking the color line of the time.
Nowhere has Langford record at 500.. He had losses because he had over 600 fights reportedly.. Why was he considered great? Well, he beat the best in every division from lightweight to heavy.. Gans, Walcott ketchell, O'Brien etc All being 5'7
There were many wht fighters who crossed the color line. Put up the right money and there would have been many more. The 3 best were black fighters, lol. Just opinion. Jack J never gave a blk fighter a shot at the title, shame on him. Jack fought mostly smaller men who today would be lt heavies or middleweights. And when Jack met a guy his own size he got knocked cold. And Jess W was considered a mediocre fighter. The best fighters of the time is a loaded question. Because many blk fighters were not tested against the great whts of the time. John L thought Peter J was not worthy of a shot and a bush league fighter with few skills. The same could be said of Joe J, and Sam M. Their rep's were greatly exaggerated. And do not forget that fighters back then were promoted like carny acts were.
Johnson twice signed to defend against Jeannette in NY the NYAC vetoed the fight.Johnson signed to defend against both McVey and Langford in Australia,the promoter cancelled the fights when Johnson jumped bail and public opinion turned against Johnson.Johnson defended his title against Battling Jim Johnson in Paris. The average weight of Johnson's opponents was the highest of the Heavyweight Champions until Joe Louis' reign.Johnson was 37 when he lost to the giant Willard.If the fight had been 20 rounds Johnson would have won.Sullivan would not go near Jackson ,though ,in fairness to him he was past his beat You have it backwards many of the best white men would not chance losing to black men.Sullivan,Corbett,Fitzsimmons,Jeffries Hart,never defended against one ,Neither did Willard,Dempsey,Tunney, Schmeling,Sharkey Carnera or Baer. You need to do some research.
@@DHEMGHJS Like was stated Jack J never fought a blk fighter after her won the title. Since what was on the books never happened you are confirming what I wrote, True that. As far as the other fighters he fought after winning the title the boxers except for Flyn and Jeff. He outweighed all the others. Some he outweighed by 40 pounds or more!!!!!! I don't know what you are looking at but your clearly very wrong strike 2. You are also clearly wrong about Wht fighters of the time not fighting Blk fighters. Corbett fought Peter J, Jack D and others fought blks coming up. And if the money was right, they would have gotten a title shot So you are wrong for the third time. There are many other reasons for whts not fighting blks. The main one was most like John L felt that many blk fighters did not have the skill to fight him. In other words, they were not worthy opponents. My team and I research usually weeks before we print what should be obvious. You seem to believe all you read and then parrot what others thought of, plagiarized. You need to keep digging till you find the truth. With so much available a much clearer picture of the time can be had. Still far from accurate. How many are on your team? Personally, when I was younger, I spoke with the older boxers who saw these guy's fight. They would have laughed at your comments,lol. I did as well.
The mythos surrounding Langford is some of the most fascinating to me. To be a man of such small stature so heavily avoided by the greatest fighters of the day is remarkable.
One of the best ever!
Nice vid ET, I'd heard Langfords name but didn't know anything about him, what an amazing fighter he was at that height and weight. Sad ending for a courageous man.
Never heard of these fighters. Thanks for always uploading interesting content.
Excellent video. Very good historical report. Photos added much to the narration.
Fred Fulton was one of three "white hope" fighters during the reign of the great Jack Johnson. All three fighters were good fighters and crossed the "color line" when other white fighters would not. All three were "heavy hitters" and put many fighters to sleep in the ring. That said, the three best heavyweight fighters during Jack Johnson's championship years were black fighters. Sam Langford, Joe Jeanette, and Sam McVey. Jack had fought all three of these men "before" he was champion and won. Of course his wins were hard fought and close. Sam was very young when he fought Jack and was really not ready yet for a prime Jack Johnson. It was a close fight none the less and that was the only time Jack would meet Sam in the ring. Joe Jeanette fought Johnson several times "before" Jack took the crown from Tommy Burns. He would never meet the awesome Joe Jeanette after becoming champ. Sam McVey, the same. Tough fighters all, and much, much better than the competition Jack did face during his reign. The Black Pather, Harry Wills, would show up at the end of Jack's days as Champion of the World. Jack Johnson drew the "color line", not out of racism for his own race, but out of the real possibility one of these three greats would beat him, most likely Sam Langford. When Fred fought Sam Langford, he was in his prime whereas Sam's best day's were behind him, although he could still lick most of the fighters around at that time who were bold enough to meet the elderly battler. Sam could still put the best to sleep past his prime, he was just that great! Fulton was good but nowhere near Sam's class! A few years earlier and bye, bye Fred!
There were many wht fighters who crossed the color line. Put up the right money and there would have been many more. The 3 best were black fighters, lol. Just opinion. Jack J never gave a blk fighter a shot at the title, shame on him. Jack fought mostly smaller men who today would be lt heavies or middleweights. And when Jack met a guy his own size he got knocked cold. And Jess W was considered a mediocre fighter. The best fighters of the time is a loaded question. Because many blk fighters were not tested against the great whts of the time. John L thought Peter J was not worthy of a shot and a bush league fighter with few skills. The same could be said of Joe J, and Sam M. Their rep's were greatly exaggerated. And do not forget that fighters back then were promoted like carny acts were.
Fulton was not a contender during Johnson's reign
@@DHEMGHJS Fred was most certainly a fighter that Jack could have met after he lost the title to Willard in April 1914. He was climbing up the rankings and although Jack was living out of the country, he was still fighting during Fred's peak years. Put it this way, Fred would have had to meet Jack outside the country to fight him. As ex-champ , Jack would have been inclined to fight a top contender to get back in the inner circle of boxing again. Fred only had about 5 or 6 fights at the time Jack lost the title. In the next couple of years he fought often and fought the best. This would have been the time for the two to meet.
@@davidabney7700 Bottom line Fulton was not in the top 3 White Hopes during Johnson's reign which was what you stated.He wasnt even in the top10.And there were no ratings until1924.The leading Hopes were ,Smith,Moran.McCarty,Wells,Palzer, Ferguson,Kaufman , Pelkey, Flynn and Willard ,with Morris,Coffey,Bell etc bringing up the rear.During Johnson's reign Fulton met 2 top fighters Morris who beat him twice. and Palzer who ko'd him.Fulton did not become a factor in the heavyweight scene until after Willard became champion.
Fulton I much better then Sam because he beat him like it or not
You find such interesting historical footage to illustrate your narrative.
Amazing commentary great channel thankyou for the information
Not really seeing how anyone can say fullton was a bum or like hed have NO shot against sam younger. Dude was still a MENACE until AFTER he was blinded. Cant just give a guy credit? I know sam had it tough in life and everyone wants to defend him but to shit on this other guy like hes nothing is just stupid. He had a uniquely powerful right hand clearly since he went undefeated until Dempsey. Is a few years prior going to make Sam's skull harder? I dont think that's how it works. That particular shot would have done that same damage regardless of whether or not Langford was "in better shape" or not. Your optic nerves cant be conditioned in boxing. If that shit happens, it happens. Sam was an amazing boxer but even with the fact that both Jack's (dempsey and Johnson) were afraid of him, johnson did still beat him once, and i honestly still think Jack Johnson would have beaten him later too. Fear doesnt mean youd lose, and I think Dempseys extremely aggressive style wouldve been overwhelming for slower paced bare knuckle type boxers like sam or Johnson. They were quick, but dempsey changed the game in terms of technique in the same way sam and johnson changed it before.
Jack Dempsey respected Langford but had little to fear from Langford by 1919. Fulton destroyed the older Langford and give him an incredible beating by all accounts in 1917. Yet Dempsey need all of 18 seconds to KO Fulton in 1918. So does anybody who knows better really believe he had anything thing to fear from the aging blinding Sam Langford after July 4 1919? In the next few years Langford would lose a total of 11 fights some by KO losses. Did the aging Langford even deserve a title shot in when a fight with Dempsey was proposed and refused by Kearns in 1923? When Dempsey first refused a fight with Langford, Dempsey was a mere noice with a handful of fights. He was wise to refuse then. But at his peak with the Langford was near blind and perhaps 6-7 years past his best? Please.
@@andrewr62 no Fulton destroy a prime sam don't go making excuses because a white men boxer beat your black boxers
@@IssacLemus-mk8bk My black boxers? Not sure exactly what you mean by that. Langford was 11 in 1917 and repeatedly losing to Harry Wills. Fair to say he was not at his peak. He was at his peak when Johnson was Champion and constantly ducking Langford. I do give credit to Fulton on this win which was the biggest win of his career. Just as I give credit to Dempsey for taking Fulton out in 18 seconds.
Thanks ET,I just bought Black Man vs the World book by Adam J Pollack,it's great.Keep up the good work,these are very interesting doc's that you tell.
Nice production as always, ET! Chris LaForce
If he fought Sam even a yr earlier it would of went diffrent. Can't discredit his win against Sam but to beat a man at his worst is a show of weak confidence
One can't say that for sure. Truth is this was an incredibly one sided fight and Langford by all newspaper accounts took a horrific beating. Dempsey needed all of 18 seconds to KO Fulton a year later. One thing I feel very comfortable saying is that if Johnson had fought Langford during his title reign 1908-1915 the outcome out have been much different than when their 1906 fight when Langford was little more than I Welterweight.
Cut the crap.
Thanks for the video and information
much bigger much younger much heavier
in his prime a guy who couldn't hold up the ring rope for sam
a guy sam who have wiped put at any time
unless coerced to carry him
Dempsey Ko'd Fulton in just a few seconds. A prime Langford would likely have done the same.
@@ET-RAMBLINGS an unshackled sam for sure. a shackled sam probably carries him like a fireman flynn or jim barry
Hard times Produce hard ass men. Its crazy.
This is so true!! The offspring of those great boxers of the 20s & 30s are now living in the suburbs and working on Wall Street ... no tough environs that produced tough guys.;
Fulton had a 90% knockout ratio he was 6’5” Langford was 5’7” . Fulton would have knocked Sam cold. Let’s not romanticize this look at that stats.
It's unfortunate that Fulton's 1st round ko loss to Dempsey is what boxing writers seem to remember of this powerful boxer. Prior to meeting Dempsey, Fulton had run up a string of impressive wins. Many of his losses were, in fact, disqualifications, and an early ko loss to Al Palzer
was a fluke.
He blinded sam. ..
Wonder did he have something on his gloves
They just gotta mention who blinded him! Basically a "BUM" he would have knocked cold in his prime! Imagine how many people jumped on the opportunity to beat up on him, when he started getting old...Just to get some kind of glory off of his legacy...boy some people!
at 5'7 langford wouldnt stand a chance with todays heavyweights
Tua was 5'9
0:30 why the Pennsylvania flag? Thanks.
Before Joe Frazier and the many other post-1930s Pennsylvania boxers, Philadelphia fight fans had the then famous Gunboat Smith. Its his picture that appears with the Pa. flag.
Dempsey need all of 18 second to but Fulton out.
I thought Fulton blinded sam Langford with a rabbit punch??
It's an incredible sport, but I cannot believe God gave us two hands so we can pummel one another.
I guess the english term for this is "Free Will"(maybe not) the thing that God gave to humans to be/do whatever the fuck they won't... and if he is God, He knew that at some point we would do that for fun, challenge, sport and even for pure evil(not the case for most of us).
I really can't see the problem when people know the risks and still want to do it, against someone who also accept it.
You said it’s an incredible sport so embrace it
Before there was man WAR was here. Waiting for him.
Boxing as with all sports are for spectator entertainment. Simple. People enjoy seeing the drama of a good battle. The guys that do it enjoy doing it.
So which is it?
An incredible sport?
Or a huge mistake by the Almighty?
The commentator has some opinions that are not shared by many. On one hand he praises SL for being so great, and then says Fulton was pretty much so so. Yet Fulton beat SL. There is no doubt about fighters of the era being tough men. However, SL reputation is greatly exaggerated. How so? Fighting records of the time are far from reality. In trying to check many fighters there is too much speculation and not enough fact. Records are shady at best; SL record varies from losing 50% percent of his matches to 40 and 35%. Which one is correct? We will never know. From my perspective SL was a good fighter. With all his losses how could he be considered as one of the greats? Not in my book. And so many black fighters are looked at not for their boxing skills, but as being brave men for breaking the color line of the time.
Nowhere has Langford record at 500..
He had losses because he had over 600 fights reportedly..
Why was he considered great?
Well, he beat the best in every division from lightweight to heavy..
Gans, Walcott ketchell, O'Brien etc
All being 5'7
There were many wht fighters who crossed the color line. Put up the right money and there would have been many more. The 3 best were black fighters, lol. Just opinion. Jack J never gave a blk fighter a shot at the title, shame on him. Jack fought mostly smaller men who today would be lt heavies or middleweights. And when Jack met a guy his own size he got knocked cold. And Jess W was considered a mediocre fighter. The best fighters of the time is a loaded question. Because many blk fighters were not tested against the great whts of the time. John L thought Peter J was not worthy of a shot and a bush league fighter with few skills. The same could be said of Joe J, and Sam M. Their rep's were greatly exaggerated. And do not forget that fighters back then were promoted like carny acts were.
Johnson twice signed to defend against Jeannette in NY the NYAC vetoed the fight.Johnson signed to defend against both McVey and Langford in Australia,the promoter cancelled the fights when Johnson jumped bail and public opinion turned against Johnson.Johnson defended his title against Battling Jim Johnson in Paris.
The average weight of Johnson's opponents was the highest of the Heavyweight Champions until Joe Louis' reign.Johnson was 37 when he lost to the giant Willard.If the fight had been 20 rounds Johnson would have won.Sullivan would not go near Jackson ,though ,in fairness to him he was past his beat
You have it backwards many of the best white men would not chance losing to black men.Sullivan,Corbett,Fitzsimmons,Jeffries Hart,never defended against one ,Neither did Willard,Dempsey,Tunney, Schmeling,Sharkey Carnera or Baer.
You need to do some research.
@@DHEMGHJS Like was stated Jack J never fought a blk fighter after her won the title. Since what was on the books never happened you are confirming what I wrote, True that. As far as the other fighters he fought after winning the title the boxers except for Flyn and Jeff. He outweighed all the others. Some he outweighed by 40 pounds or more!!!!!! I don't know what you are looking at but your clearly very wrong strike 2.
You are also clearly wrong about Wht fighters of the time not fighting Blk fighters. Corbett fought Peter J, Jack D and others fought blks coming up. And if the money was right, they would have gotten a title shot So you are wrong for the third time. There are many other reasons for whts not fighting blks. The main one was most like John L felt that many blk fighters did not have the skill to fight him. In other words, they were not worthy opponents. My team and I research usually weeks before we print what should be obvious. You seem to believe all you read and then parrot what others thought of, plagiarized. You need to keep digging till you find the truth. With so much available a much clearer picture of the time can be had. Still far from accurate. How many are on your team? Personally, when I was younger, I spoke with the older boxers who saw these guy's fight. They would have laughed at your comments,lol. I did as well.
😢💬 It seems worse when so many people think a lot of Da' Champ 🤠 Yup❕ G~G. ✏ 🗳 ☑ 🇺🇸.
Langfoed was over rayed
ｐｒｏｍｏｓｍ ❗