Is it fair for "our" mexicans of today to......

and there is absolutley no shame in that. Barrera, Morales and Marquez are all great fighters, but Sanchez was simply an extrodinary fighter.

As a mexican, I am very proud to share the same ethnicity as these four.

 

Where do you rate a prime Genaro Hernandez?

 

Addie you are missing the point , for two year Hamed looked great , he was actually past him prime by the time he was 24 , when he fought Kelly and Vasquez he wasnt even doing any road work.

My point is that two years of greatness is not enough when comparing against the people Freddie noted in his original post.

 

They are great fighters. I am not Mexican but Sanchez was a great fighter and my trainer back in the day use to show me videos of him.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wc5ysCpQog[/ame] enjoy

 

I'm going to give you my honest opinion Freddy even though it seems I might be biased towards Chava. Regarding the Nelson fight, yes, Nelson if I remember only had a 14-0 record, something like that, and gave Chava hell. But 4-5 fights later, didn't the same Nelson destroy a valiant Gomez afterwards? IMO, Nelson, having done that, is clearly showing me that he was an exception and despite having few fights, by the time he was 13-0 or 14-0 when he fought Sanchez he was already a world beater.

Just like the Cubans like Gamboa are doing, Nelson with very few pro wins was ready. IDK about Nelson's amatuer pedigree, but I am sure if Nelson was fighting anybody else that night that wasn't Sanchez or Arguello, he would of been a champion. Nelson has fought the likes of Whitaker, Ruelas, Fenech, and many other champions in his legendary career and he has said Salvador was the greatest fighter he has ever faced. That's just one of the many reasons I have Sanchez in high regard. Let's not forget Gomez despite going up in weight was the favorite to win, not Sanchez. Gomez was p4p #3 at the time and p4p #1 puncher. Also, Sanchez and Nelson were about the same age and no one had stopped a prime Nelson or any version of Nelson for that matter. Sanchez was just as versatile as they come and he was great in every dept.

 

Do you think it's a coincidence that Hamed suddenly faded at the exact same time his level of opposition was getting increasingly more difficult? Think about it.

Even if those two years include dominant victories over Wilfredo Gomez, Danny Lopez, and Azumah Nelson? A fighter would be lucky to amount three wins like that in an entire career let alone over a two year period.

 

Great lil vid there Mrjotatp4p, thanks for sharing.

As for the question posted by Freddy...

What Sanchez accomplished in his last two years was impressive. Gomez did go up in weight but was in no way "past Prime". Nelson might have been a little green but was still a force. Give me two years out of JMM, MAB, or EM career that rival Sanchez last two years.

 

Marco had a pretty spectacular 2000-2002, and in my opinion, should have got the nod over Morales in their first fight.

Still, it doesn't compare with Sanchez. He achieved more in 2 years than most fighters do in 10, and that's the point.

 

I remember reading a ring magazine interview with Nelson in the mid 90's, and he did mention Sanchez being the best he's ever faced. :good

 

Sanchez was the most accomplished mexican fighter. The only thing that kept him from being a top 15 all time was his premature death. Just watch the footage and you'll come to the conclusion that the man was something special. He had everything, power, poise, footwork, ability to transition from offense to defense and one of the greatest right hands and punching forms i've ever seen.

Lets not forget he beat more HOFers in his early 20's then almost every other great fighter. It's incredible, the man already secured his legacy, resume and status and was a HOFer by the time he was 23. We can't say such things about any other great of his time.

He's perhaps the greatest featherweight ever, certainly of the last 40 years. None of these "our" mexicans of today as you put it, can hold a candle to him, as great as some of them are.

 

Watch all of Gomez' title fights from Dong-Kyun Yum thru Jose Cervantes. Then all you need to do is watch the 1st round of his fight with Sanchez. You can watch the rest of the fight if you want to. But after watching those title fights, the opener of Sanchez-Gomez is all you need. If you're not convinced after that, you never will be.

Problem with Sanchez is that when a fighter dies in his prime, he is frozen. The inevitable decline never sets in. Many times we didn't learn the truth about a fighter's heart or chin until he started to slip physically. This never happened to Sanchez or Ohba or Sands. We never saw them lose that half-step in their footwork or that slight edge in timing.

Sal had 35 fights by the time he was challenging for the title at 21. He averaged 7 fights year in 4.5 years he climbed the ladder. He had 10 fights in the 2 and 1/2 years, he was champion.

Now we can never know for sure. We've all seen guys who were superman at 20 and finished before 25. But fighting an average of 4 bouts a year, he was on line for another 25 fights by the time he was 30.

68-1-1? Oh yeah...

 

What a prodigy. Gone too soon.

Didn't he beat up on Danny Lopez when he was only 18 or 19 years old?