could harry greb and sam langford be great vs todays boxers

For discussions on the great and not so great fighters of the past.
stevedoc
Posts: 2541
Joined: 24 May 2013, 07:40

could harry greb and sam langford be great vs todays boxers

Postby stevedoc » 24 May 2013, 09:56

simple if we took greb and langford in a time machine to now would there styles and skills still be affective against modern fighters ,would greb be to tough for martinez or how would langford fair against carl froch .
i have to say as much as i respect these legends i don't think they could compete with modern fighters ,but that's just me what do you think ...cheers
dnahar32
Editor
Editor
Posts: 333
Joined: 11 Aug 2004, 15:10

Re: could harry greb and sam langford be great vs todays boxers

Postby dnahar32 » 24 May 2013, 10:37

Yes, in general, I think most of the older fighters would translate well to the fight game today, and especially greats such as Greb and Langford.

Both Greb and Langford were pressure fighters that worked on the inside and with boxing less prevalent in gyms around the world, they had far more experience in training with other fighters and experience in the ring in their day. Through the gym wars, they learned how to absorb blows and shake them off because sparring was intense. They also stayed in shape year-round to be able to take fights whenever they came up and to hone their craft. Not to mention, they had same day weigh-ins and could not put on 10-15 pounds like middeweights routinely put on today before the actual fights. JCC Jr. was probably around 190 in his fight with Sergio when they stepped into the ring.

Greb on the inside would roughhouse and give a body beating to Sergio Martinez. Sergio would have landed shots, but he wouldn't be given time to reset and rest after he landed. Greb would use that time to nail Martinez and compensate for his slower hand speed. Greb was much naturally stronger than Martinez who is really a small middleweight/jr middle. I see Greb winning via a knockout or comfortable decision.

Langford and Froch would be no contest. Langford has faster hands, better boxing ability, and a wide variety of fighting styles. He could punch, feint, defend, or fight inside and outside. Carl Froch is a low economy fighter and reckless at times with indifferent defense. His handspeed is not very fast (Andre Ward was openly saying that to the media after his easy unanimous decision win over Froch) and while he has the power to land a KO blow, Langford had a granite chin and took bombs from heavyweights that outweighed him by thirty and forty pounds at times without going down. Suffice to say, I think Langford would win this fight in any fashion that he pleased.
BoxBuzz
Posts: 19051
Joined: 07 Jun 2005, 16:37
Location: Sleepy New England Town

Re: could harry greb and sam langford be great vs todays boxers

Postby BoxBuzz » 24 May 2013, 11:42

and in that day and age....it is my opinion less distractions generated more focous on the craft.
klompton
Posts: 1973
Joined: 07 Jul 2003, 02:27

Re: could harry greb and sam langford be great vs todays boxers

Postby klompton » 24 May 2013, 12:12

Actually Greb used his speed of hand and foot to bounce around opponents, pot shotting them, and rush inside to land a lot of quick flurries. He was an aggressive fighter but not in the sense that we now picture him as being.

I think his natural gifts: speed and stamina, would suit him well today. Keep in mind that even during his era people said he looked like he didnt know the first thing about boxing but he was so fast and threw so many punches without tiring that other fighters simply couldnt compete. That type of style would score a lot of points with judges today.

A guy like Langford who could box and had a dynamite punch would do well also. Langford looks very modern and clever to me. Against Lang he moves in aggressively, weaving his head like Tyson to draw defensive leads and counter. Against Jeanette he uses some of the same moves we see Toney use, drawing a lead, pulling back and letting fall just short, and then when the guy has overextended himself he counters with a right hand and a left hook behind it. Very clever. I think both guys would do very well today.
klompton
Posts: 1973
Joined: 07 Jul 2003, 02:27

Re: could harry greb and sam langford be great vs todays boxers

Postby klompton » 24 May 2013, 13:18

Both did have underrated skills but thats where any comparison with Greb would end. They were both primarily mauling punchers who used their physical strength. Greb primarily used speed and rarely ever sat down on his punches. He bounced all over the ring with great speed and would often pop up behind his opponents, slide along the ropes, or slip out of corners before an opponent could land effectively on him. I have dozens of reports of his fights where the opponent is estimated to have landed no more than a dozen blows over the course of a fight. An accurate puncher like Gene Tunney gave up on trying to hit Greb's head because you just couldnt do it. Galindez and Roldan were not that hard to find even against lower tier competition.
zorndeslammes
Posts: 908
Joined: 01 Jul 2007, 00:21

Re: could harry greb and sam langford be great vs todays boxers

Postby zorndeslammes » 24 May 2013, 14:31

If you just zapped forward anyone in just about any sport 90 years forward into an era where guys have modern fitness equipment, training regiments, steroids/HGH, and so on, I think they'd have problems. Really only boxing has this discussion I think where it is imagined by a significant number of people that the best of 100 or more years ago would flatten modern stars at any/all levels. You'd never hear anyone even consider suggesting this when it comes to the NBA or American Football.
dnahar32
Editor
Editor
Posts: 333
Joined: 11 Aug 2004, 15:10

Re: could harry greb and sam langford be great vs todays boxers

Postby dnahar32 » 24 May 2013, 14:51

zorndeslammes wrote:If you just zapped forward anyone in just about any sport 90 years forward into an era where guys have modern fitness equipment, training regiments, steroids/HGH, and so on, I think they'd have problems. Really only boxing has this discussion I think where it is imagined by a significant number of people that the best of 100 or more years ago would flatten modern stars at any/all levels. You'd never hear anyone even consider suggesting this when it comes to the NBA or American Football.


I think you are correct in your assessment of other sports, but let's take a look at why we can make the comparisons in boxing. The NFL and NBA do not have weight limits as boxing does. A 210lb center in the 1940s now easily weighs 300lbs. Bob Cousy growing up in the 40s did not even know how to play basketball and "made up" the idea of a behind the back dribble and other advancements because it gave him an advantage. Now, even I can go behind the back with ease. But in boxing, a middleweight had to make 160 in 1920 as he does today. A lot of those advancements you mention are used as shortcuts today by fighters who generally do not stay in fighting shape throughout the year. Also, a hard body does not substitute for technique. When you consider that boxing had far more gyms and trainers and actual fighters in the past, I think you can see where the experience of regularly fighting and learning the craft can trump a part-time fighter of today even with their nutritional advancements.
zorndeslammes
Posts: 908
Joined: 01 Jul 2007, 00:21

Re: could harry greb and sam langford be great vs todays boxers

Postby zorndeslammes » 24 May 2013, 16:37

IMO lots stylistically has changed also about boxing. People will disagree but I'm not of the notion that the sport hasn't seen significant variation and change since gloved fists and round limits were implemented. Langford, in prime, would be about Jeff Lacy size. Shorter, really. He never fought a guy Wlad's size who possessed even a semblance of a damaging jab, much less Wlads piston disguised as arm. He'd probably be in very deep fighting a Tavoris Cloud zapped from the past. Born today, he probably fights at middleweight. Maybe 168.
Clint Magnum
Posts: 672
Joined: 15 Feb 2012, 11:55

Re: could harry greb and sam langford be great vs todays boxers

Postby Clint Magnum » 24 May 2013, 18:19

Greb and Langford would be multi title ATG in this era. There was not a style they hadn't encountered, they had chins and hearts of granite and their strength/power never faded no matter how many rounds went by. No boxer today could take the heat they'd bring.
All this talk of "advancements" in nutrition & exercise etc need to take along hard look at these guys' physiques. Plyometrics is a fancy word for what these guys did. High protein/low fat/moderate carbs were the norm with natural foods which would be today labelled as "organic" and the sheer volume of their fighting kept them "match fit".
It's a shame we can only see poor quality footage of them. Many people judge them as clumsy or slow and crude. The film footage technology was in its infancy and operated by a manual turning of the cameras so it gives a staccato like impression of the fighters' movements.
:box:

Return to “Boxers of the past”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests