Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Vic-JofreBRASIL, Dec 15, 2010.
Very good stuff teeto :good
Just watched some Sanchez. When me and teeto was talking about Napoles was more technical, I wanted to say that Sanchez was more intelligent, but I did not feel like that was the right word.
Now I would say that Sanchez was more intuitive and creative, often finding his own way of doing things, whereas Napoles relied on more technical skills to do his thing.
Great analysis GP!:good
How do you mean? Any examples as far as Sanchez is concerned?
Well generally, he didn't exactly use 'proper' technique when dealing with opponents, and in general did some things not in the textbook to succeed. Whereas Napoles was much more faithful to it.
An example would be in the Nelson fight he begins to lead with a left hook counter, which isnt something you see every day. That is just one example.
Joe Naps prolly deserves the call, but Sal Sanchez was my vato from Mexico...
I like Sanchez...:bbb:deal
Also another example could be engaging Gomez from the ropes.
Gp and Teeto very good breakdowns.
If someone pointed a gun at me...I'd say Napoles by the slimmest margin. Guys would it be fair to say that Sanchez would be more apt to strategically withdrawl where Napoles wouldn't? What I mean by this is (what Teeto said), Napoles came at you with his skillset and had the utmost confidence in his ability, even maybe to a fault. He even went right at the giant Monzon who looked to be two divsions bigger.
Addendum: The Napoles who who unseated Cokes was beyond belief.
I like Sanchez better personally but only slightly. First historical fighter I watched and remember thinking he was real class. So poised and patient, serpentine was a good discription, it implies being coiled and ready to strike with venomous force, which i think is appropriate. There is also the romanticism of dying young and not forfilling his potential. To die at 23 and be considered an atg featherweight is mighty impressive.
Yeah i think i get what you mean, he was certainly very very confident in his ability, like you say, the way his quality shows early in the Monzon fight it's like he's thinking 'idon't get what the deal is with this guy, i'm better than him'
EDIT-this is a reply to dpw417, forgot to quote
On the contrary, I'd say that fight is a prime example of Napoles adopting the necessary strategy to take on a fighter with Monzon's tools. He knew he wasn't going to get anywhere boxing with finesse on the outside against an opponent of that size, so he did the only thing he could, which was to go straight at him and attempt to cause him discomfort. It didn't work, and it never would've, in my opinion, but only because of Monzon's class (in addition, of course, to his tremendous size advantage). I think Mantequilla showed that he was capable of boxing with the best and pressing the fight with the best. It all depended on the situation.
I definitely see your point...and it is valid. ( Because that is what Napoles applied or tried to anyway. And you never know what you are in the ring with until you are there.)The point I attempted to make was that Napoles might have been better served if he had not so aggressive (regardless he would not have won this fight) if he were to be more measured and not pressed so hard he may have made Monzon reach for him more(?) Then use the aggression he displayed more intermittantly instead of full on, all the time. Monzon was not a typical inside fighter, he used strength on the inside to rough opponents up, but he dialed in from a distance. But the bottom line is for me anyway is that I think Napoles could have fought more effectively against Monzon but it wasn't in his make-up to do so...But in reality it was a matter of picking your poison.
Duran found out early that he couldn't push Hagler and so he didn't. He knew that he would have to use more finesse than usual...Napoles attacked the mountain and stubbornly refused to change no matter what.
How adaptable do you think he was, though?
I kind of agree with those saying Napoles was the more skilled of the two, but Sanchez had something about him which made him just as able imo as Napoles: may I call it 'unflappability'? There's just nothing you could do to unsettle him. He could keep his concentration no matter what was thrown at him, and couldn't be thrown off by anything. He was like a machine in that sense.... Napoles was unflappable too of course, but not quite like Sanchez.
Watching Sanchez to me, especially when you wanted someone he was fighting to beat him, was like re-living a bad nightmare. You could throw everything you had at him, and punch and kick and stab and shoot as many times as you want, but you were just delaying the inevitable before you'd finally be taken down......
Am I alone in feeling this?
And how dare he pick up the pace like he could in the mid to late rounds... **** was unnatural...