Title: Langford v. Corbett
loumoore - April 1, 2006 12:36 AM (GMT)
They both had to fight as undersized heavies and were considered two of the best p4p in their era.
too close to call so i will go with a trilogy and Sam going 2-1. corbett wins the first fight, but as usual Sam gets the better of his opponent in the rematch.
any thoughts on this?
dnahar - April 1, 2006 06:12 AM (GMT)
I think if Langford fought aggressively, he would decisively outpoint Corbett and maybe stop him late in a 20-25 round fight. But if he fought cautiously, I tend to agree with your 2-1 series because Corbett's boxing skills would keep him even in a fight with Langford and Corbett would probably win with his height advantage coming into play.
Deepak
JackBlackburn - April 10, 2006 01:13 AM (GMT)
corbett was not a physically strong guy. he had huge problem with pressure fighters like tom sharkey. watching langford on film the other day, he was a great pressure fighter and combination puncher. he threw very straight punches. like tom sharkey, he was short and stockey but more skilled and more powerful. sam was fast, he cut off the ring very well. i see sam stopping corbett in 10, i cant see corbett being able to cope with sam's combination of pressure, speed and power. sam is one of the greatest punchers of all time.
langford KO 10 corbett
loumoore - April 11, 2006 03:11 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (JackBlackburn @ Apr 9 2006, 08:13 PM) |
corbett was not a physically strong guy. he had huge problem with pressure fighters like tom sharkey. watching langford on film the other day, he was a great pressure fighter and combination puncher. he threw very straight punches. like tom sharkey, he was short and stockey but more skilled and more powerful. sam was fast, he cut off the ring very well. i see sam stopping corbett in 10, i cant see corbett being able to cope with sam's combination of pressure, speed and power. sam is one of the greatest punchers of all time.
langford KO 10 corbett |
what fight did you see on tape? and how does one get their hand on something like that?
also the reason why I would say JC would take at least 1 fight is because he had great skill. also he went the distance with Jackson, beat Sullivan (okay an old and overrated sullivan) and used to school Jeffries, and in their first fight went 25 rounds. i think in a 20 round fight he could take a decision. but Sam, would get him in the next ones. you are dead right. he had a lot of power and skill. might not ever be another Sam Langford.
here is a quote about Sam in his rematches
"The second time he gets into the ring Sam takes an indignant look at his opponent and mutters ‘look-a here white man you got to stop picking on me thisaway.’ And the rest is too sad to mention.”
mike - September 12, 2006 01:02 AM (GMT)
tough one again-he may be referring also to fitz bout- but corbett never got a rematch and corbett was very fast with plenty of endurance. san may be out boxed here.51-49 out of 100 goes to corbett-stlyle smarts,height and corbetts top performances against jackson and sullivan were considered here. anyone else??