Armstrong vs Pep featherweight primes ???

I like pep by close decision. But this would be his hardest fight. While henry will be busier, I expect Pep to land the cleaner blows.

 

Hm, I´ve written this posting three times. Each time I had another one winning. Can´t call it.

 

Don't write it off as Saddler vs Pep because it's different. A lot of Saddler's reach, height, and power were problems. Pep isn't dealing with something that physical and long so that won't be as much as a problem. Obviously Henry is a huge work-horse and the greatest in-fighter ever. Remember Pep was past prime for his Saddler bouts. Prime vs Prime is really a toin coss. Maybe a favor Henry.

 

Armstrong may be a harder match up for Pep than Saddler in a lot of ways.

 

Well Pep of early 1940s beats Saddler quite clearly imo. Even a past his prime pep outboxed saddler on the cards pretty easily in 3 of the 4 meetings. I think Saddler may have been the worst matchup for Pep, and a past his prime Pep managed a wide victory against him.

 

I'm not sure. Pep can utilize his movement and feinting ability much better on a shorter, smaller fighter. Armstrong has to get inside. Saddler had huge physical tools and a strong jab.

It's really a case of defense vs offense.

 

Armstrong was much better defensively and more unpredictable offensively than Saddler, which could play as equalizers to Saddler's size.

 

Armstrong swarms all over Pep and outworks him to a decision in my opinion.

It would be competitive, with Pep possibly handling Armstrong in the early rounds, but to me you had to be able to fight it out with Armstrong in order to stand a chance at beating him over 15 rounds. Pep wouldn't be able to deal with Armstrong in close, he would only be able to hold him off with his use of footwork, combinations, clinching and the occasional rough tactics like against Saddler. Armstrong is not as rangy as Saddler, but he is even more aggressive and plain better when it comes down to it.

Great as Pep was, certainly a better pure boxer than Armstrong and arguably anyone who ever lived, he would not be able to overcome the relentless force that was Henry Armstrong at his peak.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBPKYomoSRA[/ame]


Pep of course would not stand in front of Armstrong as much as Ross did (or was forced to do), so it wouldn't be a complete wipeout.

 

Thing is though, Pep was busy himself, this is forgotten in this match up. He is constantly changing angle and popping shots off.

I can definitly see him having some sucess stepping to the side as Armstrong comes in and rattling off combinations but it is keeping it up all night long. I think that is the hard thing.

This is so close, I cant decide, but I lean towards Armstrong, well today anyway.

 

TGA, I dont like the Ross comparison. Ross was an agressive technician, pep was much more defensive, and wa stylistically so much different.

 

That's not always the case though - if you'll excuse the tenuous stylistic comparison, think of Ali/Frazier. Obviously we never really saw Ali against somebody like Saddler, but he seemed to have more trouble with a guy with quicker pressure and the ability to get under his shots. Pressure from a shorter guy who "swarms all over" you is a different kind of pressure in many ways. It could cause Pep more trouble, lacking a still target and not giving him room for maneuvre.

 

I didn't compare Pep to Ross, as I said Pep wouldn't stand in front of Armstrong, but that's about the best Armstrong footage that is out there.

 

Thats fair enough, misunderstood you.

No-one is doubting if Pep stands in front of armstrong he is a goner. But I have very rarely seen Pep stand infront of an opponent.

 

I have also very rarely seen Armstrong stand still and let an opponent do whatever they wanted to do against him.

Ross is a different fighter from Pep, but look how well he deals with Billy Petrolle's pressure:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVFAgdFK6i4[/ame]


Armstrong was just in a different class.