How good was Eusebio Pedroza?

Dirty, but very good featherweight. Alphonso Zamora ko'ed him as a bantamweight. Most of the the Boxing Magazines had a Sal Sanchez vs Pedroza fight as a toss-up in their primes....sad the fight never came off.

 

He was good, but was helped a bit by his cozy relationship with the WBA. He arguably lost the first Lockridge fight. Also had a draw with the speedy Bernhard Taylor. Fouled Juan Laporte a ludicrous amount without getting DQ'd.

I believe Salvador Sanchez would have beaten him pretty easily, probably by late rounds ko or wide decision.

 

One of the great tv fighters of the 80's. Not a dynamite puncher, wasn't super fast. But skill was off the charts,,,, And that other skill, rabbit punching, holding and hitting, lacing,low blows, butting. Pedroza was a master. I loved to watch him just to see what he'd get away with .... I think the referees just didnt believe what they saw with their own eyes.lol. they were like did he really just do that in front of me?

 

I marvel at his reflexes with hand speed and defensive moves.

 

Very good,good enough to be 50/50 with Sanchez imo .
And also very dirty!

 

Pedroza v Sanchez would have been a great one. Pedroza was very skilled but as you say,dirty.

 

A truly consummate campaigner over the 15, with seemingly endless stamina and who tended to drag his opponents out over the distance; almost all of them wilting, with some succumbing in those championships rounds.

Defended his title all over the world, in the backyards of several and sometimes under difficult circumstances; the first Lockridge bout being one of those occasions, when Pedroza had left making the weight a little late and came in dehydrated.

The controversies he courted during his career do not, in my opinion, overshadow what was an extraordinary skill set, consistently demonstrated with, in the main, stoic composure.

I'd Rank Pedroza as a Top-10 ATG Featherweight, and a contest between he and Sanchez would have been a Pick ‘em bout, had it ever came off.

 

Very good. He was stopped by a few fighters (including Zamora) as a fledgling but improved dramatically as he rose in weight. By the time he had a tight one with Lockridge he had near 10 defenses behind him and about 14 by the BT Express draw. All the mags i saw that had Dream matchups between he and Sanchez picked Pedroza. Whilst this surprised me it's a testament to how good they thought he was as well as how good his style would mesh with Sanchez's.

Superb fighter.

 

What's your basis for this? Pedroza took his title on the road defending in others back yards ,Sanchez never did.

 

Eusebio "El Alacran" Pedroza is arguably the 2nd best Boxer to hail from Panama after Roberto Duran. Pedroza in my belief deserves to crack the top Ten ranking in the list of all-time featherweights in history with about a #8 ranking after as follows:

(1) Eder Jofre;
(2) Willie Pep;
(3) Sandy Saddler;
(4) Salvador Sanchez;
(5) Jem Driscoll;
(6) Abe Attell;
(7) Young Griffo;
(eighth) Eusebio Pedroza;
(9) Juan Manual Marquez;
(10) Azumah Nelson

I believe that on any given night El Alacran could defeat any Featherweight in history. He was knocked out three times, all in the 2nd round prior to becoming champion. His first title shot he met & was knocked out in the 2nd by the undefeated (24-0) Alfonso Zamora, who was defending his WBA Bantamweight Alphabet strap.

In a computerized Tournament that I saw, Welshmen Jem Driscoll (53 Wins -4 Defeats -6 Draws) KO(39) Knocked Out Willie Pep in the 12th Round to win the All-Time Featherweight Title.

Driscoll also could have his record supplemented by newspaper bouts where he went (7-1) that aren't counted in his official record. Driscoll had an eighteen year Boxing career from 1901 to 1918. Driscoll never won the World Featherweight Title because the current Champion Abe Attell wouldn't risk his crown against Driscoll but right after Attell won the World Featherweight Title by defeating Eddie Kelly (W20-L8-D11) by a 7th Round TKO after flooring him 4 times in the round, Attell (W53-L13-D4) met Driscoll W48-L2-D4) in Madison Square in Garden in a Non-Title Bout that Driscoll was declared the victor by 9 of the 10 Newsparers that chose a winner, with only one scoring the mill a draw covered the match from ringside, including the New York Times. Only Bat Masterson of the Morning Telegraph who was a personal friend of Attell scored it for him. The Brooklyn Times scoring the mill a Draw. There was little real doubt that Jem Driscoll was the much better pugilist who truly dominated the bout by doing everything better than reining Champion Abe Attell who fought like a frightened man who was just trying to survive too ensure he wouldn't get knocked out. Since defense was Attell forte he was able to last the ten rounds but the question loomed even larger that he probably couldn't last (15 or more) heats with Driscoll in an actual bout with the Featherweight World Championship on the line. The reality would most likely would have ended with the Welshmen winning the World Title which would have have been justice served... but Abe Attell was not known for being the type to do the right thing and admit that Driscoll had earned a genuine chance at a Title shot. On the contrary, Abe Attell was widely known for NOT having any integrity at all. Attell was all about money and when cheating was necessary it would be employed without hesitation. The only thing that would have gotten Attell into the ring with Driscoll would have been either a guaranteed fix where he would have Driscoll throw the fight, which is something Driscoll would never do.; or in the alternative, if Attell was assurred of receiving an unbelievable payday where Driscoll would virtually come out of the match with only the Title and all of his hard work & diligence would give him a Title but simultaneously put him in the poor house. This decision was predicated of course, based upon Attell being throughly beaten by Driscoll at Madison Square Garden on February 19, 1909. Attell knew that there was really no aspect of the game where he was Driscoll 's equal. Even in Attell's adroit defense, he was second best to Driscoll. The one area that Attell supporters cite is Attell's Ring Generalmanship, which does contain some credence, because it was Attell's intelligent use of the ring, and knowing when and when not too tie up Driscoll, or when to, where necessary, actually stand and trade in short firefights that were nothing more than spurts here and there to fight his way out of trouble when necessary. It was Attell's keen Ring Generalmanship which truly allowed him to last the distance at the Garden match. But that wouldn't be enough to garner a victory in a Championship Bout no matter how much Attell and his cronies stacked the deck and Atell knew it well. Therefore a rematch was out absolutely of the question for the shifty and dirty Abe Attell and his cronies. Despite the fact that Abe Attell was actually a very good if probably gifted boxer he wasn't brought up to be a man of honor. He was a lowbrow blackheart who felt honesty was the mark of a fool. However, he knew understood the reality of the limits of his skill, and came o grips with the facts that he just didn't possess the talent or courage to put his title on the line with a superlative talent like Jem Driscoll, which quite frankly, was an enterprize that as a Champion he was alone in practicing. The same was true of Lightweight Champion Battling Nelson who refused to fight Packey McFarland after a sarring session with him. There are of course many other Boxers who shared this fate, none more than the black fighters who were deprived by the color of their skin. Even Jack Johnson wouldn't fight another Black Fighter once he won the Heavyweight Title. Jack Dempsey fought Black Boxers up until he won the title and then stopped. The great Harry Greb was one of the rare breed he never drew the color line. In the end the great Jem Driscoll was deprived of Boxing immortality because Abe Attell knew one beating from Driscoll would all he would ever take and of course he never did take another one. However, every country in Europe recognized Jem Driscoll as the legitimate Featherweight Champion and it's unanimously held that Driscoll was the better Boxer by Boxing Historians and much of that could be based on this bout on February 19th, 1909, alone.

 

If you're going to alter my post to suit your view, at least start off with a correct fact - HE LOST BY KO2 to Alfonzo Zamora in his first world title shot. lOL

I didn't even mention the Zamora fight in my post.

 

So he fought on the road.

Sanchez was more resilent, phsyically a bit stronger and had just as much stamina. Pedroza would have hard time dominating the championship rounds against him. He was also very, very stoic and Pedroza's various illegal tactics would not fluster him at all.

Also, it's not like Sanchez fought in Mexico all the time.

He won the title beating the hometown guy, Danny Lopez.

 

I don't think anyone would dispute the greatness of Sanchez but it's hard to really separate him from Pedroza, in terms of resilience, strength or, indeed, stoicism.

Yes, Pedroza suffered knockouts, as an underdeveloped teenager/twenty-year-old. But, after putting on half a stone or more, he became much stronger and was never stopped again. And no surprise, since he had a bigger than average frame for a featherweight.

In terms of Pedroza's performances down the stretch, he was more than capable of ramping up his output, as a fight wore on. Would he have dominated Sanchez in the championship rounds? Of course not.
Would he have given Sanchez a helluva fight, from start to finish? Definitely.

Also, Sanchez fought almost exclusively in Mexico or the US and, Lopez, whilst American, was from California (his backyard), not Arizona (where their first bout took place).

Pedroza fought in Papua New Guinea, South Korea, Japan, Italy; not to mention the various Latin American countries and the States he traveled to, including Bernard Taylor's hometown of Charlotte, NC.

He deserves some credit for having the mental fortitude to consistently perform away from home to his opponents' advantage, in many cases.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Did you edit your post? I am positive you made mention of the Zamora fight which was why i mentioned it in my post :huh