Donald Trump is an outlandish story, but not a myth. The depravity of Rome is an outlandish story, but not a myth. "Outlandish" doesn't mark something as untrue.

I would guess the problem you have with the story is Samson's strength. Let's honestly examine some elements you consider outlandish.
Judges 14.6. He killed a lion with his bare hands. ABC news, 2019: Colorado runner kills cougar with bare hands after it attacks him. [url]https://abc7.com/mountain-lion-cougar-puma-panther/5122361/[/url]

Judges 14.19. He killed 30 men by himself. The text doesn't say he did it all at the same time or even on the same day. Mass murderers, bullies, street fighters, and soldiers attest that this is possible, though horrific.

Judges 15.4. He caught 300 foxes, tied their tails together, and sent them burning the fields. Again, it doesn't say this happened all in one day. The word translated by the NIV as “fox” is believed to be a more generic term that could also refer to jackals. It is likely that jackals are used here just from the practical standpoint. Foxes hunt alone while jackals hunt in packs. Trapping this large a number of foxes would require not only great amounts of time, but also cover a large range of territory. Getting this many jackals would be a more manageable task in that whole packs could be captured at once.

Judges 15.7. He killed a lot of people. So the guy's a brute. Is this unbelievable? It's believable, but horrible. What a jerk he was.

Judges 15.15. He killed 1000 men. The same word that means “a thousand” (lph) with different vowels means “clan.” He didn’t necessarily kill a thousand men, but he may have decimated the large group (squadron?) that came after him. Same situation as in 14.19. If Samson was a warrior and a killer, this is feasible.

Judges 16.30. He pushed the pillars of the building apart and the building collapsed. The verb used in v. 30 suggests a twisting motion from which we can infer that Samson turned the pillars off their stone bases thus removing the support of the roof and causing its collapse.

So you see, I don't need a rigid presupposition of inerrancy to see that the story is plausible. I just need an open mind, some research, and common sense.

This is an outlandish story. Common sense tells us it's a myth. Only someone with a ridgid presupposition like the Bible must be inerrant would think it actually happened.

Because riddles are a motif used in fables doesn't mean that every riddle is evidence of mythography. Through all of history, people have tested each other's critical thinking skills with riddles. Riddles were sometimes also used to see where a person's true thoughts or loyalties lay. Greek philosophers used them in rhetoric and education.

why give them a riddle and a clue and chance to cut his hair in the first place? These are the characteristics of a fable or myth. You have to solve the riddle to get into the dragons den or for the fox to help you cross the river.

I do believe he lost his strength. His strength wasn't his own, but special strength given to him by the Lord. When he fell from the Lord, God no longer gave him that "infusion," so to speak.

It's not that the hair was magical. The point is neither the hair nor its length but instead what the hair represented: The vow to God that he would be different from everyone else in his dedication to the Lord. The cutting of his hair would bring the vow to an end. He was right: when he allowed his hair to be cut, the Lord's blessing (of strength) and protection would leave him, and his ability to judge the Philistines with the help of the Lord would be gone. Without the help of the Lord, he was no different than anyone else.

Do you believe Samson lost his strength after Delilah solved the riddle and cut his hair?

Seem like a myth.