Barry Mcguigan v Azumah Nelson .. why didnt it happen ?

No ****...

 

Still waiting for Fleas opinion on Pedroza-Nelson....:bart

 

I was hoping your post wod be concerning that Gaz :good

The Sanchez comparison is valid, in terms of 'if he did that well against an arguably greater fighter when green than in his peak he would probably beat Pedroza...., but, for me, Nelson at his peak was less gung-ho, but sturdier. I'd go for Pedroza to snatch the closest of victories based on him being more nuanced.

I'd say Nelson was a jack of all trades master of none. Pedroza remains one of the more criminall underrated boxers of all time IMO, could be awkward and fluid at the same time.

Regardless of him slipping, McGuigan outpunching him was a momentous victory.

 

My Grandad always talked about McGuigan blatantly ducking Nelson.

 

Its a great matchup mate and I wouldn't argue too strongly against anybody who picked either man in a very close fight. As you say, Pedroza is underated by history, maybe it was following Sanchez, the fact he never unified or the lack of a great fight against a great Featherweight.....

I guess its understandable for Brits, he's "just" the guy that lost to McGuigan..

 

Probably the greatest response ever...

 

That was the first post I read when I woke up this morning. Brought a smile to my face!!!:good

 

I remember when they spoke with LaPorte after he had fought both Pedroza and McGuigan, he said the better fighter of the two was Pedroza...:yep

 

Good post.

Out of the three, I think Sanchez appears the most formidable H2H. His resume, and the wide range of skillsets he conquered, is astonishing considerng the amount of time he accomplished it and at such a young age.

Nigh on unbeatable at the weight IMO, the only slight on him I can think of is that he sometimes performed to the level of his opponents and found himself having to work harder for the W.

Then again, when you've been punch perfect against arguably THE most dangerous puncher in the history of the division you can afford to take it easy every now and then :yep

 

I dare anyone to argue with this fact........:yep

 

Nelson was faster , a better technician and had a better chin. He did have some hard fights with lesser men than Barry. Barry had a huge reach for a featherweight, it was longer than Marciano's apparently. Good body puncher, better than Hatton. It would be a fantastic fight, but for everything Barry could do i can see Nelson coming up with a solution, i cannot say the same for Barry. Nelson by KO.

 

Didnt seem to harm Fenech too bad, the first time around.

Close as hell is all I can say.

Imagine the inside fighting, now that would be superb. I think Pedroza was the slightly more adaptable guy in the way that he could fight on the back-foot or front-foot, on the ropes or mid-ring, and he really was comfortable where ever he was.

Nelson was much comfier as a pressure fighter IMO.

Pedroza is definitly as good as Sanchez IMO.

 

cheers! difficult to find any holes in the logic.

does anyone know for a fact that the fight was actually put to Barry McGuigan?

One punch can change a whole fight, McGuigan had good reach, plenty of power and loads of heart, i'd pick him to win, late stoppage.

Hes one of my all time favourites, not only as a boxer but a really sound man as well.

 

It was the ninth - the last decent performance from a vastly under-rated boxer. If I remember, the first Daho fight took place in the corner of a TV studio (on World of Sport?), with the small audience level with the apron and they invaded the ring before the count was complete.

Maybe it's local bias, but I think the Cowdell who fought Sanchez would have been too much of a stylist for McGuigan in what would have been one of the great all-British fights of the eighties.

 

i watched the cowdell/sanchez fight a while ago and i had sanchez winning quite handily i thought cowdell was a little to negative

how did you score it