Whats Your Top Ten Hd 2 Hd Featherweights in History

Saddler was decent but he was no Paddy DeMarco.

 

Well, we can't know for sure what he lost. His all-round resistance might be the best guess as to what he lost.

JG said he was never quite as good all-round after he was in that plane-crash.

But the point about beating 100 guys can be mooted by you saying he lost to the best guy he faced. At the highest level (which Saddler undoubtedly is) even losing a step can be the difference of winning or losing. It wasn't as if he was beating guys of Saddler's ability in that run was it?

If he was beating guys, or even one guy, even near Saddlers level, it would make your point almost undeniable.

Pre-plane crash you could argue that he beat a guy on the level of Saddler, Chalky Wright, with ease, three times.

What I'm saying is that whilst past his prime, Pep showed he could handle a prime Saddler. Also in the footage we have, we see how Pep can out-box Saddler.

Pep prove he could hang with Saddler, and we can see how he could win. That is my point.

As for what other fighter would go 3-1, we can't answer that because Pep never fought anyone else on Saddler's level to settle if it was actually a styles thing, or if he had lost it.

Fair enough, bad point by me.

 

Pep is God. I guess the questions will always surround quality of opposition because the fact remains Saddler was the best fighter he ever faced and won 3/4 of the series.

I'm really not in-tuned to a lot of the caliber of his opposition, which I know has been questioned in terms of quality in comparison to fighters like Benny Leonard, Mickey Walker, etc. Part of the problem of not have filming on him is you don't have film on his opposition. But people of the time do call of him the greatest boxer they've ever seen. He didn't jump multiple weights but he was the most dominant fighter we'd ever seen for some stretch of time... tough to evaluate, although it's not like Saddlers record is better (But that's not whats disputed atm).

 

That is a good point, but in the second fight Pep either proved, he can hang with that rough stuff, or he stopped Saddler from getting to him. What do you think it is?

His opponent level, makes it hard to place the Saddler lose to style or if he had lost it.

Sure his opponent level wasn't the best, but these weren't complete push-overs and he did look outstanding against them. Point taken though.

So the combination of the two was what threw off the defensive masters you think?

DeMarco has to be the worst Lightweight champ I have seen on film.

 

But that is one fight.

You can't tell much from a 5min clip can you?

I think with Wright he showed he could beat elite opposition, but you could argue Pep was the perfect foil for Wright.

 

After the plane crash Pep was not only getting touched up (Which was rare) but he got dropped and then struggled with Archie Wilmer. I guess, if Pep was never the same then it was his legs and or punch resistance like Greg has suggested that were probably most affected. The people who saw him in person seem to make that claim and only they really know. I wonder, if he looked bad early on but regained that form. But since he lost to Saddler it's an easy find for pulling the excuse of him never being the same. I seem to take more away from Pep winning the 2nd bout against Saddler than any of the other fights, though.

 

Definitely guessing.

Same

You mean Saddler here?

If so I agree. I don't really understand what your nattering about here though.

OK fair enough, I sort of mentioned this later.

I sort of cover this later too.

 

Its the only faults (minus punch power) that come up with Pep and they surfaced post-plane crash. A coincidence?

Agreed

I disagree.

If I showed you a 5 minute clip of Duran quitting to Leonard, would that be an accurate represntation of Duran?

 

Leonard is the best master-boxer :deal