First things first, this is not a hate thread. Just my opinion on somethings concerning Sanchez especially those recently discussed on ESB. I agree with everyone's sentiments that he was a great fighter. Definitely an ATG of all-time and at 126 top-10 ATG list. He has a complete mastery of the ring and overall a complete fighter. Add the fact that he has beaten superb quality of opposition. He has acheived so much in so short a time he was alive. At which time the point I'm trying to make comes about. That every opinion, most specifically a mythical match-up between Sanchez against any other past/present fighter especially outside 126 lb division is open for speculation and unless it does not display any sense or logic, should be acceptable. To emphasize my point, let's just say a match-up between Pac and Sanchez took place at 130. Of course the common answer you would get is "Pac is too one-dimensional, Sanchez by decision or late-TKO" right? That is their opinion. They have valid reason and analysis on why they reached that conclusion. Then comes the other side of the coin, why does it seem like a Pac win over Sanchez seems hard to swallow? First of all, the fight is only imaginary. We are basing the outcome of the fight from what we saw of them and how we assess their capabilities. Is it really really improbable for Pac to win? Remember, the fight is supposed to take place at 130. Sure, Sanchez is a great featherweight. But being a great fighter in one weightclass doesn't always translate to be dominant in another. Who knows, maybe a few pounds can affect his speed and power. Maybe shots of heavier men can have an effect on him. Those are also intangibles that must be put to consideration. An argument can be made that Sanchez has a lanky frame that will allow him to carry the additional weight. Not always the case. Carlos Zarate was a superb bantam and a tall one to boot, but he was never a factor at 122. How many guys in history have succeeded in one division only to falter just as he makes a move up. I'm just saying, we should all stop marveling at what he was "supposed" to do. Let's all appreciate what he has done. There's already plenty.
Where's the fun in that? over half the topics on this board involve mythical "what if" matches of one type or another. And when a fighter died as young as Salvador did having not really shown any *****s in his armour he's always going to get the nod over a fighter who was around long enough to be exposed as human! I don't think you could write off pac in a fight like this...anybody who can hit like him can ever be completely written off people just base there opinions on what they see of both guys.no harm in that :bart
I will not have the memory of arguably the greatest featherweight in history up there with Sandy Saddler, the Great Willie Pep and my personal hero the lengendary Azumah Nelson denigrated in any way whatsoever. Sanchez is the greatest fighter to come out of Mexico all due respect to the many great great fighters Mexico has produced. Pac Man is good but his struggles with the likes of Marquez a fine fighter and champion indicate he would lose to Sanchez, Nelson, Saddler and the Great Willie Pep. The real question is what would have happened in a rematch between Sanchez and Nelson from 1984 when Azumah was properly readied. Now that would have been really something. One thing I do know is that Azumah Nelson's career has honoured the legacy of Sanchez and no doubt somewhere up there in Boxing heaven Sanchez is smiling and vindicated by the his last fight and win against the greatest fighter to date from the African continent who he fought as a 12 fight inexperienced novice and last minute substitute. Great fighters even greater men.
In order to understand the accolades that Sanchez gots one must first understand his resume'. Lopez TKO twice Castillo UD Gomez TKO Nelson TKO That is a DAMN SERIOUS resume' for anyone, let alone a 23 year old kid!
I understand the point made here, and it is by no means outrageous. Just look at it like this- Gomez is most probably the greatest SBW ever, and when he moved up to fight Sanchez, it wasnt competitive. This means it could maybe be a problem for Sanchez moving up to PacMan, who is comfortable at 130 - in theory. I personally see Sanchez winnin', he even has an argument as a top2 or 3 at 126 in that brief time he had a chance to establish himself. But PacMan has been 1 one of the greatest of this era, im not a fan of his at all BTW, he beat most of my favorite fighters!!!
Sanchez seemed to fight to the level of opposition, and step it up for the big fights. Sanchez-Pacquiao would be a big matchup. Pacquiao could have his moments but I think Sanchez wins. However, Euesbio Pedroza SD 15 Salvador Sanchez
Not a bad call at all, though a big one. As you said, Sanchez fought to the level of his competition, which is why I perhaps underrated him a bit at first, seeing the errors and weaknesses he showed against lesser opposition. Weaknesses I assume would've been exposed by a few great fighters. However, whenever faced with the best, he performed at his best. That's a sign of true greatness. At 126 I'd take him to beat Arguello by Decision, at 130 it's a difficult call, but I'll lean towards Arguello for reasons already mentioned by the threadstarter, questions, etc. However, Sanchez would've handled Pacquiao.
How the hell is Pedroza gonna beat Sanchez, when got gift decisions over LaPorte and Lockridge. Plus he never fought anybody who could punch, that's why he never fought Gomez. Pedroza beat a past his prime Olivares, and that has people thinking he can beat Sanchez?. Don't say he would foul and low blow his way to a victory, because Sanchez had the best poise of any fighter I've ever seen and would not buckle down because of some low blow's.
