Whats Your Top Ten Hd 2 Hd Featherweights in History

I'm starting to break you down I'd say. Your getting sloppy.

Can't dispute that.

The big question I want you to answer is how did Pep win the rematch: Did Pep show he could cope with Saddler's rough work? Or Did Pep stop Saddler getting to him, completely?

 

Benny? Any reasons him and not Pep Swarmer (Besides him not being Italian, obviously).

 

How much was the 3rd fight more of a freak injury? Why couldn't Pep continue in the 4th fight? Another injury?

 

Thats not answering my question. So what is stopping a prime Pep repeating this? He showed when he was not at his best he could do it.

Whatever way you look at the rematch, to me it points to a prime Pep win.

 

Yeh, it does. I'm being slow.

So, OK, lets say its a prime Pep. He loses the first to Saddler, adapts, wins the second. Who takes the next two?

'He'? Saddler?

What were these adaptions?

I get you here.

I get you, but the win over Saddler seems to be pretty thorough. And I think whatever way you take it, it shows pep undoubtedly had the tools to beat Saddler.

 

The best pastafarian in the game is Canzoneri, obviously.

I think that in terms of mental game, and adherence to orthodoxy Leonard is the best ever. Pep does some things that aren't in the book. Benny Leonard is the book.

 

Paddy looks brutal on film, but he somehow came up with wins over great fighters. Went 2-1 against Saddler.

Saddler I think was beatable, but it was always a rough night with him. Pep said he always had the skill to outbox him but the will wasn't there aside from the second bout, although in fairness to Pep the third fight was a legitimate injury after Pep had been doing a similar job on Saddler and a fourth rematch followed. In this fight a slowed up Pep decided to trade punches and dirty tricks with Saddler (he had actually been learning Judo in preparation!) and was again winning on the cards but quit due to a bad cut caused by Saddler's rough-housing.

Humberto Sierra took a young Saddler to school and was KO'd by Pep. Charley Riley worked Saddler over in the early rounds only to lose a majority decision and was KO'd in five by Pep. You have to take this into account also when discussing the head to head abilities of the two. Saddler may have had Pep's number, but I don't think he's the H2H beast that he is made out to be out of a win over Pep. Sometimes a fighter just has the style to trouble the other and Saddler was that guy for Pep.

 

I need to research the 2nd fight, if my guess is right, Pep found a way to neutralize Saddler, or found a way to cope with his rough-housing. So if I find out which one, it could go a long way to proving my point.

fair enough.

OK.

I'm getting real tired, pal. I'm gonna have to call it a night. Good debate, might resume it in the morning, or wake up and go 'What the **** was I arguing about, I don't agree with anything I said, I just spouted a load of shite.'

 

So he's more technical, and thus a superior master-boxer? I don't agree with that logic. Leonard is probably the superior fighter for the reasons you mentioned.

 

No, he's just a more fundamental boxer. I'm talking about the difference between Tommy Loughran and Whitaker or Burley here.