Salvador Sanchez vs Azuhma Nelson (how highly do you rate the win?)

I think people need to consider how inexperienced Azumah Nelson was. This can't be regarded as a "great win" for Sanchez simply based on Nelson becoming a great later on. Nelson at the time was a complete nobody. Obviously he proved in the fight that he was better than that, but he was so completely unseasoned at the time, 13 fights over nobodies, mostly in Africa. I'm not sure how he even got the call.

 

This is a fantastic post. Superb job, Jel. I am not surprised

 

You made some good points here, but Azumah was already a great fighter at that point. It was reflective in the quality of his performance and the actual fight itself, one of the greatest featherweight fights I have ever seen.

 

Why is Sanchez overrated and That era weak in your
opinion?

 

Thanks man!

 

It could be argued that he perhaps became a great fighter in the fight, but there's no comparison between what he was then and what he'd be after, or a few years down the line. Experience counts for so much.

 

That argument is tenuous. Nelson had but a handful of fights between the Sanchez bout and his eventual title-winning effort against Gomez. How different was he really? How different could he have been?

 

A lot different. The confidence and experience gained from the fight itself even, and the support he would have gained by establishing himself as a name, fights in US instead of Ghana and Zambia, would have made massive difference.
13 fights before Sanchez only.
Then 15 rounds with the best in the world.
5 fights between Sanchez and Gomez fights.

That's a huge difference.

 

Hard to say. Nelson had no business looking that good after so few fights, but sometimes things just come together.

 

Two years and five or six fights suddenly turns you into an ATG? Not buying that.

 

Excellent points from both sides.

Well, as compared to Sal, with more fights under his belt, Azumah later obviously secured a stunningly better result v Cowdell but not so v Gomez and Laporte though I understand some might posit the same argument re lack of experience in Laporte’s case as at the time he engaged Sal.

Sanchez himself was an underrated quantity when he took on and defeated Lopez and Lopez, perhaps fairly described as that much better prepared for the rematch, was still well beaten.

I suppose the next thing to consider, if one feels Nelson became so much better, is actually breaking down what the better version does or doesn’t bring to the table in a rematch as compared to their ‘82 fight.

For Nelson, as previously stated, I see pros and cons in that regard, the net sum of which may not necessarily see him take in any greater chance in a later rematch.

Sal himself was accruing sterling experience in quick time, including the Nelson fight, but always stepping up and winning at each turn.

He was only 23 when his career was abruptly halted, so, in terms of assumed improvement, can we apply similar indexing for an even better Sanchez in the ensuing years had he not sadly passed?

 

Nice post, I've been impressed with your input, keep it coming.

 

I hear your point but consider this: Sal beat a closer to prime Gomez more convincingly than a seasoned Professor beat a more past prime version of Gomez. Take it for whatever it's worth. Sal died at just 23. For all we know, he could have gotten even better.

 

Cheers. You beat me to it Pugguy. Good job

 

There's no comparison? You and I will have to agree to disagree