Is Eusebio Pedroza In The Top 10 Of Grt Featherweight s?

To be fair though, After a great start, I think he lost the second one to Rocky.

 

I scored the 2nd one a draw, but I thought Lockridge had a better argument for winning the 2nd one. I think 1st one is often labelled a robbery, because one judge had a ridiculous scorecard. But the fight itself wasn't a robbery in my opinion.

 

No way. He low blowed the hell out of Laporte and that in itself took alot out of Juan. Add to the fact he did it on purpose and that's grounds for a DQ.
I watched that first fight with Rocky and Eusebio fell short. What surprised me was it was Rocky that finished stronger. Even the announcer who was Gil Clancy thought he lost.

 

Yes I agree Pedroza was lucky not to get DQed vs LaPorte, but the actual scoring RBR I thought Pedroza won it pretty clearly, and I have to score it based on that.

I know the commentators agreed that Lockridge won it, but I didn't agree with some of the rounds they scored for Lockridge. They had Lockridge like 7-1 in front after first 8 rounds, Lockridge had a strong start but it wasn't that one sided in the first half in my opinion.

 

See that's how I viewed it as well- Rocky swept like the first half of the fight. But it wasn't a one sided fight I agree.
There was one low blow that Eusebio hit Juan with that I have no idea how Juan didn't fall down - I mean Eusebio really dug into it.

 

Pedroza usually had to resort to low blows, rabbit punching and back hands when the chips were down.

 

I like how certain fighters can do something and its "savvy" or slick and others do the exact samething and its dirty.
Tommy Loughran was beloved for only basically having a left jab and movement. He was called a phantom of the ring.
Virgil Hill does the exact samething and is called boring or a runner.

 

I have tried in the past to point that out on this forum, many disagreed with me, stating that he needed an edge. Salvador Sanchez did not need an edge, he was a very skilled fighter, cool, calm and collected. If you are highly skilled there is no need to fight dirty to win.

 

Pedroza could be filthy, but it wasn't like many of his contemporaries were any more pristine in terms of approach. Chandler used his forearm liberally on the inside. Hagler sometimes led with the head. Gomez pretty much threw out the rulebook when he fought. Let's not even *begin* to discuss Hamsho.

Anyway, he's pretty clearly top ten for me. Not too many were better, or more complete, when they were at their best.

 

Just outside IMO.

 

My first thought was #10 sounds about right for Pedroza . He's certainly one tough out for any featherweight who ever lived.