Who rates higher Willie Pep or Sandy Saddler

Saddler. The results speak for themselves.

 

Got to disagree with this. Pep is the consensus choice as the greatest featherweight of all time and the reason is he was champion for the better part of 7 years before Saddler beat him. Pep was also past his best when the defeat finally came.

Saddler winning their series 3-1 isn't irrelevant, of course, and it plays it big part in Saddler's place near the top of the division. But you can't ignore the long dominant title reign that came before that series took place. And that's the reason Pep is no. 1.

 

This is it but Saddler is a very respectable #2.

 

Pep wins on defence, cuz it is a masterclass on how to move, while saddler isnt exactly a masterclass on how to punch (though hes one hell of a puncher and pretty close)

Only problem in the matchup is, peps punches are a bit light
He then has to contend with Saddler for every single round
And sooner or later pep is going to get hit
So with saddlers power... thats a bad matchup

But I think it is the case of "who could catch pep"
And honestly, catching brilliant defenders isn't easy to do
So, saddler accomplished that
And I think that is interesting in and of itself

A good defender getting caught isnt a surprise to me (though it is an event!)
When you are a defender you are always going up against the odds of getting hit (which are high)
So it doesn't take anything away from pep that he lost
But it makes for an interesting watch to see what contributed to being able to catch one of the best defenders that put on gloves
So all props to saddler for bringing us that result

I dont imagine catching pep of all people to be an easy thing, haha (understatement)

I think catching pep was about ego though. Pep for some reason just didn't want to run. He didn't realise how dangerous it was to stay in there with that guy. And Peps guard isnt made to stop bombs.

I do rate pep higher but saddler definately won. He did the right things, like cutting off the ring, going to the body, getting inside and locking pep down. Alternating high and low.

 

It's a good question that causes you to think about the criteria for ranking fighters. Pep seems to be the consensus choice for #1 featherweight of all time, but he fought a four fight series against his major contemporary and was stopped in three of them. In many ways that's hard to reconcile. If regardless of circumstances Ali had lost 3 out of 4 against Frazier or Norton, or Duran the same against DeJesus, would they still be viewed as the top dog in their respective divisions? The flipside I guess is that no-one ranks Zivic over Armstrong despite results in the ring.

During the series Saddler proved that at that point in their careers he had Pep's number. In order to rank Pep above him, there would need to be various mitigating factors:

• Pep being past his prime
• Saddler being a bad style match-up rather than simply a better fighter
• Pep's record outside of the series being overwhelmingly superior

I think there is a good case for the third one, but only above featherweight. The second one I am not convinced about, purely on the basis that a freakishly strong featherweight like Saddler would be a bad style match for anyone at that weight.

The first is often talked about, but the lack of footage of pre-crash Pep makes it really difficult to judge how far he had slipped by the time he fought Saddler, and what lingering effects he had from the injuries he suffered. The fact that Pep was such a big favourite coming into the first fight suggests that there weren't any obvious signs of decline in the fights leading up to it.

All said and done, you can make a strong argument either way. P4P I rank Pep higher, but at featherweight I think Saddler should get the nod. He only lost 4 times at the weight, one of which was in a 3-1 series against Pep, and two were while he was still a teenager. It's not like there are major blemishes on his record at featherweight that downgrade him, and there isn't much more he could have done to prove his greatness.

 

Saddler wins three out of four decisively. The fourth is not only the victor's biggest ever win but a fight if the year. To me I se it as Saddler, straight up.

 

Correction on this one, Sandy won one, the first, decisively with Pep taking the second and having the lead at the time of the stoppages in fights three and four.

 

Willie Pep

 

But he lost both by tko. That’s decisive.

 

Pepe should be higher. Saddler just had the style to beat him the way Norris beat Leonard

 

Another interesting way to look at it:

Saddler’s 3 best wins are infinitely better than Pep’s 3 best wins.

And it’s not like SS has a bunch of bad losses, especially at 127 and most especially in his prime.

 

That’s hardly relatively unknown.

Find me accounts of Pep BEFORE he lost to Saddler talking about how much he’s lost and how he was a shell of his former self. He continued a long unbeaten streak after the plan crash.

Was he injured in it? Undoubtedly. Did he recover? His record would suggest that he did.