Boxing Historian Chronicles Career of Sam Langfordby Jeanne Whithead/Digby Courier (Canada) October 23, 2008
"In 1903 at age 17, Sam Langford was a professional boxer, earning purses of hundreds of dollars. When not in the ring, he strolled the streets of Boston wearing fancy clothes and diamonds. Not bad for a boy from the Maritimes, who five years earlier was earning five dollars a month in the woods of Nova Scotia.
Boxing historian Clay Moyle chronicles Langford's career in his 400-page book 'Sam Langford, Boxing's Greatest Uncrowned Champion'.
Nova Scotians will be pleased that the story begins at the beginning - with Langford's birth in Weymouth Falls in 1886. Moyle follows the lad as he runs away from home at age 12 to Digby, then to Grand Manan and on to Cambridge, Mass., as a 15-year old.
After being fired from his job at Cambridge brickyard for fighting during work hours, Langford moved to Boston where he was 'discovered' by flight club owner, Joe Woodman.
Moyle's history is a detailed account of Langford's career as a professional boxer.
Among the highlights: in 1903, Langford defeated lightweight champion, Joe Gans in a 15-round decision. Weighing in at 136 pounds, Langford was four and a half pounds heavier than Gans, and was denied the lightweight title because the lightweight limit was 135 pounds.
Langford was always eager to improve his abilities and he didn't hesitate to ask his opponents for tips that would make him an even better boxer. He took their advice to hear, and progressed from being an untrained 'natural' to being one of the most skilled boxers in the world.
By age 21, Sam Langford, a middleweight, had gone the distance ith highly regarded heavyweight Jack Johnson, and though promoters were keenly interested in having him fight out of their clubs, the best fighters in America steadfastly avoided him.
A married man with expensive tastes, Langford did the only reasonable thing. He sought matches abroad and in 1907 created a sensation in England, returning home $4,600 richer less than three months later. In the years that followed, he also fought in Australia, France, Canada and Mexico.
Even for those who may not be enamored with the boxing world, the Sam Langford book is a pleasurable read. This is because Moyle is a skilled writer - and because we all love stories of little guys who overcome obstacles to achieve their dreams.
A historian, Moyle includes just the fact that he was able to unearth and verify. This means that the book is lacking details of Langford's personal life. That would have made the book more satisfying for the average reader."
Friday, October 24, 2008
Monday, September 22, 2008
Dublin Herald - Sept. 20, 2008 by Pat Myler
BOXING COLOUR BAR CRUELY DENIED LANGFORD HIS JUST REWARD
NOWHERE in the long list of world champions will you find the name of Sam Langford -- and that's nothing short of criminal.
The title of Clay Moyle's long overdue biography, Sam Langford: Boxing's Greatest Uncrowned Champion, says it all.
If justice had been done, the Boston Tar Baby would have won a world title at any weight from lightweight to heavyweight, probably several, but he never got the chance.
One of Sam's problems was that he was a black man in an era of blatant racism in boxing. The other was that he was too good.
He beat lightweight king, Joe Gans, held welterweight champion Joe Walcott to a draw, and took heavyweight legend Jack Johnson the distance in a hard-fought 15 rounder, but they were all non-title fights.
So prevalent was the 'colour-bar that gifted black fighters like himself, Sam McVea, Joe Jeannette and Harry Wills were forced to fight each other over and over again in order to stay active.
The great Jack Dempsey admitted: "There was one man, smaller than me, I wouldn't fight because I knew he would flatten me. I was afraid of Sam Langford."
In a career spanning 23 years, the only title Langford managed to acquire was the relatively meaningless heavyweight championship of Mexico, and by then he was heading for 40 and nearly blind.
American Moyle, a dedicated and respected historian, has done the sport a genuine service with his thoroughly researched, loving written account of a remarkable man and fighter. To find out how to purchase a copy ($35 including postage (to the U.K.) check it out at www.samlangford.com
BOXING COLOUR BAR CRUELY DENIED LANGFORD HIS JUST REWARD
NOWHERE in the long list of world champions will you find the name of Sam Langford -- and that's nothing short of criminal.
The title of Clay Moyle's long overdue biography, Sam Langford: Boxing's Greatest Uncrowned Champion, says it all.
If justice had been done, the Boston Tar Baby would have won a world title at any weight from lightweight to heavyweight, probably several, but he never got the chance.
One of Sam's problems was that he was a black man in an era of blatant racism in boxing. The other was that he was too good.
He beat lightweight king, Joe Gans, held welterweight champion Joe Walcott to a draw, and took heavyweight legend Jack Johnson the distance in a hard-fought 15 rounder, but they were all non-title fights.
So prevalent was the 'colour-bar that gifted black fighters like himself, Sam McVea, Joe Jeannette and Harry Wills were forced to fight each other over and over again in order to stay active.
The great Jack Dempsey admitted: "There was one man, smaller than me, I wouldn't fight because I knew he would flatten me. I was afraid of Sam Langford."
In a career spanning 23 years, the only title Langford managed to acquire was the relatively meaningless heavyweight championship of Mexico, and by then he was heading for 40 and nearly blind.
American Moyle, a dedicated and respected historian, has done the sport a genuine service with his thoroughly researched, loving written account of a remarkable man and fighter. To find out how to purchase a copy ($35 including postage (to the U.K.) check it out at www.samlangford.com
Monday, September 8, 2008
Price break on international orders
As of September 8th, international orders placed on www.samlangford.com will receive a price break on shipping. Int'l shipping charges for orders placed on that website will now only cost $5.05, bringing the total purchase cost to $35.00. This applies only to orders placed via that website.
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
Review from September 2008 issue of 'Boxing Monthly':
"Boxing Monthly – September 2008
Reviews by John Exshaw
Sam Langford: Boxing’s Greatest Uncrowned Champion by Clay Moyle, Bennett & Hastings Publishing
More than a bit-part player. Langford was feared and avoided by the leading fighters of his day, including the legendary Johnson. B
In 1917, when heavyweight prospect Fred Fulton found himself matched with an ageing but still dangerous Sam Langford, he sensibly decided to seek advice on how best to defeat the legendary “Boston Tar Baby” from Harry Wills, a fighter who had suffered a couple of early-career losses to Langford but who was no winning their bouts on a regular basis. “The best way,” Wills informed him, “is to take a club and when he ain’t looking just bust him on the head, and when he turns around with ever so much surprise, just bust him again and knock him dead.” “And then?” enquired Fulton. “Nothing,” replied Wills, “only don’t miss the second shot.”
While this may not have been quite the advice Fulton was hoping for, it nicely illustrates the high regard in which the murderous-punching Langford was held by his peers, among whom he seems to have been both liked and feared in equal measure. Long recognized as one of the great fighters, Langford has finally received his literary due in Clay Moyle’s admirable biography, Sam Langford: Boxing’s Greatest Uncrowned Champion (Bennett & Hastings Publishing, $29.95), which not only succeeds in recounting Langford’s remarkable ring exploits, but also in rescuing him from his recent position as little more than an extra in the Jack Johnson story.
Over the years, of course, one has learned to be wary of accepting at face value claims of supherhuman powers supposedly possessed by fighters in the early days of gloved boxing, claims that often seem to have more to do with myth-making and nostalgia than with any notion of objectivity, to say nothing of possibility. In Langford’s case, however, the evidence is persuasive, not least because so much of it is based on the testimony of his opponents and fellow professionals, rather than that of contemporary newspaper reporters more interested in fiction than fact.
As for his record, it too speaks for itself. In 1903, 20 months after turning professional, Langford decisioned world lightweight champion, Joe Gans, in a non-title bout, and the following year, was considered unlucky when his bout against welterweight champion, Joe Walcott, was ruled a draw. In 1909 and 1910, he twice stopped Walcott’s successor, the “Dixie Kid”, in addition to boxing a no-decision draw with middleweight champ, Stanley Ketchel. At the same time, Langford, who stood only 5 ft 6 ½ inches in height and whose best fighting weight was about 12 stone, also turned his attention to the heavy mob, regularly flattening opponents who outweighed him by as much as two stone. Not for nothing did Jack Johnson remark that “Sam Langford was the toughest little son of a bitch that ever lived.”
Much as been made of the fact that Langford, Joe Jeannette, Sam McVea, (and, later, Harry Wills) were forced into endless round-robin of match-ups between themselves due to the unwillingness – based on either fear, prejudice, or both – of white fighters to face them, but Mr. Moyle’s research reveals a rather more complex picture. After all, it was Jack Johnson himself who denied Langford & Co. a shot at the title, while, with regard to the “white hopes”, there seems nothing particularly remarkable in the fact that then, as now, managers would choose to protect their charges in the hope of a lucrative title shot. Not that there was any doubt in people’s minds about the outcome of any such bouts; as James J. Jeffries put it, “How long do you suppose these fellows would last with Sam Langford? Why, he would just name the round he would knock them out in.” Attempts, particularly by the Australian promoter, Hugh D. McIntosh, to make a Johnson-Langford match, were continually rejected by Johnson who, as Joe Jeannette observed, “beat Sam once, when Sam was only a middleweight, but…wouldn’t have anything to do with him when Sam got bigger and better.”
And so Langford was doomed to engage in a never-ending dance with the same partners (including the suicidally brave – or stupid – white heavyweight, Jim Barry, who, despite 11 beatings from Langford, never stopped trying) until he could dance no more. Though blind and broke, Langford continued to be held in high esteem, living quietly but seemingly contentedly until 1958. Sam Langford, which contains 98 photographs and a ring record, is, it needs hardly be said, an essential requirement for any self-respecting pugilist-specialist-reader, and can be ordered through amazon.com or from www.prizefightingbooks.com. A revised edition, including an index (and hopefully with better punctuation), is apparently in the offing.” (NOTE: The book already includes an index)
"Boxing Monthly – September 2008
Reviews by John Exshaw
Sam Langford: Boxing’s Greatest Uncrowned Champion by Clay Moyle, Bennett & Hastings Publishing
More than a bit-part player. Langford was feared and avoided by the leading fighters of his day, including the legendary Johnson. B
In 1917, when heavyweight prospect Fred Fulton found himself matched with an ageing but still dangerous Sam Langford, he sensibly decided to seek advice on how best to defeat the legendary “Boston Tar Baby” from Harry Wills, a fighter who had suffered a couple of early-career losses to Langford but who was no winning their bouts on a regular basis. “The best way,” Wills informed him, “is to take a club and when he ain’t looking just bust him on the head, and when he turns around with ever so much surprise, just bust him again and knock him dead.” “And then?” enquired Fulton. “Nothing,” replied Wills, “only don’t miss the second shot.”
While this may not have been quite the advice Fulton was hoping for, it nicely illustrates the high regard in which the murderous-punching Langford was held by his peers, among whom he seems to have been both liked and feared in equal measure. Long recognized as one of the great fighters, Langford has finally received his literary due in Clay Moyle’s admirable biography, Sam Langford: Boxing’s Greatest Uncrowned Champion (Bennett & Hastings Publishing, $29.95), which not only succeeds in recounting Langford’s remarkable ring exploits, but also in rescuing him from his recent position as little more than an extra in the Jack Johnson story.
Over the years, of course, one has learned to be wary of accepting at face value claims of supherhuman powers supposedly possessed by fighters in the early days of gloved boxing, claims that often seem to have more to do with myth-making and nostalgia than with any notion of objectivity, to say nothing of possibility. In Langford’s case, however, the evidence is persuasive, not least because so much of it is based on the testimony of his opponents and fellow professionals, rather than that of contemporary newspaper reporters more interested in fiction than fact.
As for his record, it too speaks for itself. In 1903, 20 months after turning professional, Langford decisioned world lightweight champion, Joe Gans, in a non-title bout, and the following year, was considered unlucky when his bout against welterweight champion, Joe Walcott, was ruled a draw. In 1909 and 1910, he twice stopped Walcott’s successor, the “Dixie Kid”, in addition to boxing a no-decision draw with middleweight champ, Stanley Ketchel. At the same time, Langford, who stood only 5 ft 6 ½ inches in height and whose best fighting weight was about 12 stone, also turned his attention to the heavy mob, regularly flattening opponents who outweighed him by as much as two stone. Not for nothing did Jack Johnson remark that “Sam Langford was the toughest little son of a bitch that ever lived.”
Much as been made of the fact that Langford, Joe Jeannette, Sam McVea, (and, later, Harry Wills) were forced into endless round-robin of match-ups between themselves due to the unwillingness – based on either fear, prejudice, or both – of white fighters to face them, but Mr. Moyle’s research reveals a rather more complex picture. After all, it was Jack Johnson himself who denied Langford & Co. a shot at the title, while, with regard to the “white hopes”, there seems nothing particularly remarkable in the fact that then, as now, managers would choose to protect their charges in the hope of a lucrative title shot. Not that there was any doubt in people’s minds about the outcome of any such bouts; as James J. Jeffries put it, “How long do you suppose these fellows would last with Sam Langford? Why, he would just name the round he would knock them out in.” Attempts, particularly by the Australian promoter, Hugh D. McIntosh, to make a Johnson-Langford match, were continually rejected by Johnson who, as Joe Jeannette observed, “beat Sam once, when Sam was only a middleweight, but…wouldn’t have anything to do with him when Sam got bigger and better.”
And so Langford was doomed to engage in a never-ending dance with the same partners (including the suicidally brave – or stupid – white heavyweight, Jim Barry, who, despite 11 beatings from Langford, never stopped trying) until he could dance no more. Though blind and broke, Langford continued to be held in high esteem, living quietly but seemingly contentedly until 1958. Sam Langford, which contains 98 photographs and a ring record, is, it needs hardly be said, an essential requirement for any self-respecting pugilist-specialist-reader, and can be ordered through amazon.com or from www.prizefightingbooks.com. A revised edition, including an index (and hopefully with better punctuation), is apparently in the offing.” (NOTE: The book already includes an index)
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Book photograph discrepancies
There are a few discrepancies pertaining to photographs that are in need of explanation. First on page 336 there is a photo of Sam as a younger man. The caption identifies the picture as being from 1912 in Australia. This is clearly in error as he is much younger. The caption will be revised to say "Undated" and moved to an early grouping of photos in a 2nd printing.
On page 172 there are two photographs of Sam fighting against Jim Barry. Both are identified as April 14, 1910, but Barry is clearly wearing different color and lengths of shorts in the two photos, so one is obviously dated incorrectly. After further investigation I have determined it is the photo on the bottom that is incorrect. That one will be revised to say "undated" for a 2nd printing.
On page 399 there is a photo of Sam's headstone that indicates he was born in 1883. On the first page of the opening chapter I indicate that he was born on March 4th of 1886. The reasons I settled on 3/4/1886 as his correct birthdate include the following:
His manager, Joe Woodman, said that at one point he investigated the issue himself and located Sam's birth certificate and that it confirmed 3/4/1886 as the correct date.
In a series of articles published in 1924 Sam identifies 3/4/1886 as his date of birth. (Source: Halifax Herald, August 12, 1924)
Throughout the book the reader will find Sam making references to his age at different stages of his career and those coincide with a birth year of 1886.
I have a copy of an 1891 census that identifies Sam as being 6 years of age at that time. (Now that could also point to 1885 as a birthdate, but in any case it certainly confirms 1886 more than 1883.
I have another document titled 'Descendants of Charles Langford' that gives a birthdate of March 6, 1886 for Sam.
Another document titled 'Children of Robert Langford and Charlotte Robert' lists their children and gives March 6, 1886 as Sam's birthdate.
On page 172 there are two photographs of Sam fighting against Jim Barry. Both are identified as April 14, 1910, but Barry is clearly wearing different color and lengths of shorts in the two photos, so one is obviously dated incorrectly. After further investigation I have determined it is the photo on the bottom that is incorrect. That one will be revised to say "undated" for a 2nd printing.
On page 399 there is a photo of Sam's headstone that indicates he was born in 1883. On the first page of the opening chapter I indicate that he was born on March 4th of 1886. The reasons I settled on 3/4/1886 as his correct birthdate include the following:
His manager, Joe Woodman, said that at one point he investigated the issue himself and located Sam's birth certificate and that it confirmed 3/4/1886 as the correct date.
In a series of articles published in 1924 Sam identifies 3/4/1886 as his date of birth. (Source: Halifax Herald, August 12, 1924)
Throughout the book the reader will find Sam making references to his age at different stages of his career and those coincide with a birth year of 1886.
I have a copy of an 1891 census that identifies Sam as being 6 years of age at that time. (Now that could also point to 1885 as a birthdate, but in any case it certainly confirms 1886 more than 1883.
I have another document titled 'Descendants of Charles Langford' that gives a birthdate of March 6, 1886 for Sam.
Another document titled 'Children of Robert Langford and Charlotte Robert' lists their children and gives March 6, 1886 as Sam's birthdate.
Saturday, August 9, 2008
Sept. 1904 Welterweight Title Fight with Joe Walcott
‘The Union’ newspaper account of the September 1904 Walcott-Langford welterweight title fight. Courtesy of NH State Library:
“LAKE FIGHT WAS A DRAW.
Walcott and Langford in Fifteen Found Mixup
They Weighed In At 142
Champion Was Outpointed by His Adversary – But Carried the Fighting to Langford – The Preliminary Was a Burlesque and Spotty Coyne. Gave a Tiresome Exhibition
One of the main sporting events of Labor day was pulled off at the Coliseum before upwards of 2,000 people, when Joe Walcott and Sam Langford fought fifteen rounds for championship honors. The fight ended in a draw, Langford outpointed the title holder from the start, ____ _____ the ____ Walcott was forced to carry the fighting to him. Owen Kenney officiated the bout, and his decision appeared to meet with general approval, although it was unquestionable a Langford (______?).
((Can’t make out much of the 2nd paragraph, which is about the preliminary bout))
Third paragraph:
I can’t make out the first three words of the first sentence, but after that it looks like it says: “was started on time” and then: “Walcott was the first to enter the ring. He was accompanied by “Honey” Melody, Peter Walker, Harry R_____?, and John (Breslin?), all of Boston. The champion wore an American flag about his belt. Langford was seconded by James Welsh, Ed Keevin, and B____ J_____ all of Boston.”
Fourth paragraph:
“Before calling time Referee Kenney announced that both men had weighed in at 142 pounds - Walcott appeared heavier – and would fight fifteen rounds for a decision, the fighters to protect themselves at all times and break on command of the referee.”
Fifth paragraph:
“The first round started in lively, although it was mostly sparring for an opening. Walcott appeared to be playing for the body and Langford for the head. In the second round Langford was in and out and all over the ring.
Walcott reached home with a good left swing to the jaw in the third and the fighting warmed up as the round progressed. Langford drove several stiff rights to the jaw toward the last of the round, and the bell sounded with the fighting in Langford’s favor.
Honors were about even in the fourth.
In the fifth, Walcott drove a left to Langford’s jaw. Langford returned the blow with a left to the jaw and the fighters mixed up. This was also Langford’s round.
The sixth was a general slam-bank contest, Langford driving left and right to jaw and body. The blows appeared to have little effect on the champion, however, and he kept chaffing Langford, a trick of his when his opponent is getting in some telling blows.
Walcott forced the fighting continuously in the seventh.
In the eighth Walcott started in as if to end the bout then and there. As he would plant a stiff left on Langford’s ribs he would say: “I’ve got ‘im Billy, just wait, I’ve got ‘im.” Langford put a sudden stop to the chaffing, however, with a right hook to the jaw that sent the champion reeling. This he followed up with a couple of uppers cuts and a left drive to the jaw. The fighting in this was the fastest of any round.
The next four rounds as far as points were concerned were easily Langford’s, although in each he hung back and let Walcott force him.
In the thirteenth Walcott got an upper cut that made his teeth rattle and started him to bleeding at the mouth. He drove a vicious right swing to Langford’s jaw before the round ended.
Walcott came up the fresher of the two in the fourteenth and landed left and right on Langford’s wind and jaw. Langford drove a heavy right to the jaw, but the heavy body blows that he had been taking appeared to have winded him.
In the fifteenth and last round both men came up fresh. Walcott refused to shake hands and Langford went in to make him pay for it. This round was fast and furious, although neither lost his generalship. The bell sounded with both men on their feet and honors about even.
Referee Kenney’s decision of a draw was greeted with applause.
The management of the bout had made arrangements for a big crowd, erecting two extra stands capable of seating 1,000 people, although, many Boston sports came up, the attendance did not pan out as anticipated, the new stands only being about half (full?)”
“LAKE FIGHT WAS A DRAW.
Walcott and Langford in Fifteen Found Mixup
They Weighed In At 142
Champion Was Outpointed by His Adversary – But Carried the Fighting to Langford – The Preliminary Was a Burlesque and Spotty Coyne. Gave a Tiresome Exhibition
One of the main sporting events of Labor day was pulled off at the Coliseum before upwards of 2,000 people, when Joe Walcott and Sam Langford fought fifteen rounds for championship honors. The fight ended in a draw, Langford outpointed the title holder from the start, ____ _____ the ____ Walcott was forced to carry the fighting to him. Owen Kenney officiated the bout, and his decision appeared to meet with general approval, although it was unquestionable a Langford (______?).
((Can’t make out much of the 2nd paragraph, which is about the preliminary bout))
Third paragraph:
I can’t make out the first three words of the first sentence, but after that it looks like it says: “was started on time” and then: “Walcott was the first to enter the ring. He was accompanied by “Honey” Melody, Peter Walker, Harry R_____?, and John (Breslin?), all of Boston. The champion wore an American flag about his belt. Langford was seconded by James Welsh, Ed Keevin, and B____ J_____ all of Boston.”
Fourth paragraph:
“Before calling time Referee Kenney announced that both men had weighed in at 142 pounds - Walcott appeared heavier – and would fight fifteen rounds for a decision, the fighters to protect themselves at all times and break on command of the referee.”
Fifth paragraph:
“The first round started in lively, although it was mostly sparring for an opening. Walcott appeared to be playing for the body and Langford for the head. In the second round Langford was in and out and all over the ring.
Walcott reached home with a good left swing to the jaw in the third and the fighting warmed up as the round progressed. Langford drove several stiff rights to the jaw toward the last of the round, and the bell sounded with the fighting in Langford’s favor.
Honors were about even in the fourth.
In the fifth, Walcott drove a left to Langford’s jaw. Langford returned the blow with a left to the jaw and the fighters mixed up. This was also Langford’s round.
The sixth was a general slam-bank contest, Langford driving left and right to jaw and body. The blows appeared to have little effect on the champion, however, and he kept chaffing Langford, a trick of his when his opponent is getting in some telling blows.
Walcott forced the fighting continuously in the seventh.
In the eighth Walcott started in as if to end the bout then and there. As he would plant a stiff left on Langford’s ribs he would say: “I’ve got ‘im Billy, just wait, I’ve got ‘im.” Langford put a sudden stop to the chaffing, however, with a right hook to the jaw that sent the champion reeling. This he followed up with a couple of uppers cuts and a left drive to the jaw. The fighting in this was the fastest of any round.
The next four rounds as far as points were concerned were easily Langford’s, although in each he hung back and let Walcott force him.
In the thirteenth Walcott got an upper cut that made his teeth rattle and started him to bleeding at the mouth. He drove a vicious right swing to Langford’s jaw before the round ended.
Walcott came up the fresher of the two in the fourteenth and landed left and right on Langford’s wind and jaw. Langford drove a heavy right to the jaw, but the heavy body blows that he had been taking appeared to have winded him.
In the fifteenth and last round both men came up fresh. Walcott refused to shake hands and Langford went in to make him pay for it. This round was fast and furious, although neither lost his generalship. The bell sounded with both men on their feet and honors about even.
Referee Kenney’s decision of a draw was greeted with applause.
The management of the bout had made arrangements for a big crowd, erecting two extra stands capable of seating 1,000 people, although, many Boston sports came up, the attendance did not pan out as anticipated, the new stands only being about half (full?)”
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
The Ring boxing magazine review of Langford book
The following review of 'Sam Langford, Boxing's Greatest Uncrowned Champion' from the Fall 2008 issue of The Ring boxing magazine just hit the newstands on July 29th:
"Boxing Bookshelf
What sort of fighter could train on gin and pork chops, but was still good enough to beat the best lightweight of the day, draw with the best welterweight and middleweight of the day, beat one of the best light heavyweights of the day, and strike such fear among the heavyweights of the era that the champion would avoid him?
If you answered Sam Langford, give yourself a long, stinky cigar, the sort favored by Langford, and congratulate yourself. Langford beat Joe Gans, held Barbados Joe Walcott and Stanley Ketchel even, whipped Philadelphia Jack O'Brien, and got the best of most heavyweights during the Jack Johnson era. He fought Johnson too, Johnson won, but saw enough to know he didn't want a rematch.
Much of Clay Moyle's fine, new book, Sam Langford, Boxing's Greatest Uncrowned Champion (Bennett & Hastings, 429 pages, hardcover, $29.95), pulls together many of the myths and facts about Langford, and makes his worldwide pursuit of Johnson into a chase equal to Captain Ahab's stalking of Moby Dick.
Langford's career seems to be the basis for many archetypes. Here we have the supremely talented black fighter who was stifled during the years of Jim Crow (denied even by Johnson, the black champion of the time); he fought beyond his prime, until his eyes were so bad that he had to feel his way along the ropes to find his corner between rounds; he ended up penniless and alone, occasionally struck down by passing automobiles because he couldn't see.
But Moyle, a member of the International Boxing Research Organization, also reminds us that Langford had a large following in America, as well as in Europe and Mexico. As the book's many wonderful photographs show, Langford was every bit as colorful as Johnson. And for a cactus-stump of a man who disdained training, Langford was a marvelous fighting machine with a profound knowledge of the ring.
There will always be those who over-praise Langford, those who insist he wouldn't been 200-0 with 200 knockouts, if only he weren't handcuffed by the indignities of the era. While it's undoubtedly true that Langford carried some opponents and took a few dives, he also lost a lot of bouts due to his poor conditioning. Moyle follows the usual argument that when it appeared his shot at Johnson's title would never happen, Langford grew fat and lazy. Still, Moyle approaches the subject in an even-handed manner, and is never maudlin.
One wonders how boxing history might've changed if Langford, rather than Johnson, had been the first black fighter to win the heavyweight championship. Langford was certainly a more crowd-pleasing fighter, and if half the quotes attributed to him are true, he was better with the press. Moyle's book makes us think 1908 America might've enjoyed seeing Langford wear the crown. At the very least, Langford wouldn't have denied Johnson a title shot."
- Don Stradley
"Boxing Bookshelf
What sort of fighter could train on gin and pork chops, but was still good enough to beat the best lightweight of the day, draw with the best welterweight and middleweight of the day, beat one of the best light heavyweights of the day, and strike such fear among the heavyweights of the era that the champion would avoid him?
If you answered Sam Langford, give yourself a long, stinky cigar, the sort favored by Langford, and congratulate yourself. Langford beat Joe Gans, held Barbados Joe Walcott and Stanley Ketchel even, whipped Philadelphia Jack O'Brien, and got the best of most heavyweights during the Jack Johnson era. He fought Johnson too, Johnson won, but saw enough to know he didn't want a rematch.
Much of Clay Moyle's fine, new book, Sam Langford, Boxing's Greatest Uncrowned Champion (Bennett & Hastings, 429 pages, hardcover, $29.95), pulls together many of the myths and facts about Langford, and makes his worldwide pursuit of Johnson into a chase equal to Captain Ahab's stalking of Moby Dick.
Langford's career seems to be the basis for many archetypes. Here we have the supremely talented black fighter who was stifled during the years of Jim Crow (denied even by Johnson, the black champion of the time); he fought beyond his prime, until his eyes were so bad that he had to feel his way along the ropes to find his corner between rounds; he ended up penniless and alone, occasionally struck down by passing automobiles because he couldn't see.
But Moyle, a member of the International Boxing Research Organization, also reminds us that Langford had a large following in America, as well as in Europe and Mexico. As the book's many wonderful photographs show, Langford was every bit as colorful as Johnson. And for a cactus-stump of a man who disdained training, Langford was a marvelous fighting machine with a profound knowledge of the ring.
There will always be those who over-praise Langford, those who insist he wouldn't been 200-0 with 200 knockouts, if only he weren't handcuffed by the indignities of the era. While it's undoubtedly true that Langford carried some opponents and took a few dives, he also lost a lot of bouts due to his poor conditioning. Moyle follows the usual argument that when it appeared his shot at Johnson's title would never happen, Langford grew fat and lazy. Still, Moyle approaches the subject in an even-handed manner, and is never maudlin.
One wonders how boxing history might've changed if Langford, rather than Johnson, had been the first black fighter to win the heavyweight championship. Langford was certainly a more crowd-pleasing fighter, and if half the quotes attributed to him are true, he was better with the press. Moyle's book makes us think 1908 America might've enjoyed seeing Langford wear the crown. At the very least, Langford wouldn't have denied Johnson a title shot."
- Don Stradley
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)