Pep Vs Pac at 126

Thanks:good

Styles make fights even in Comic books.....unless you are simply outclassed (kinda like boxing, but not completely. Batman has no chance at say, The Spectre, or Galactus, no matter what he planned)

 

very interesting.. but it seems nostradamus got back his life and is lurking again in this forum.. sweet pea will help us out with that one

 

saddler may not have looked like much, but he broke the rythm of the great pep and Pac is a bit more predictable. I can see Pac beating Saddler on a decision and hurting him bad in parts of the fight BUT, saddlers physical strength and toughness and the fact that he rolled over lightweights because the feathers wouldnt fight him, has me thinking this is a tossup match.

 

Saddler vs Pep is a great example of puncher vs swarmer. Saddler was ranked as one of the best punchers of all time(top 5 by Ring Magazine), which is something the clip doesn't show, and I don't think most of you knew about him. Very little of Saddler in the clip aside from bits of him in the middle of the ring, which was not his strong spot. But I guarantee you Pac would think twice about swarming at every opportunity if faced with the kind of power Saddler brought, and if the fight was in close range, Saddler would brutalize him. Saddler was one of the craftiest, dirtiest in-figthers ever, whereas the inside is definitely not Pac's strong spot.

Against more straight forward boxers or boxer/punchers like Barrera, Marquez, and Morales, Pac seems to be at his best because of his speed and power, though he can even be susceptible to those styles.

 

It's also interesting that while he is criticizing people picking against Pacquiao because it's a fantasy match and there is no proof, he doesn't criticize Pacfans, even though the same thing applies to them.

Actually, the whole post has that same problem. His post applies to both sides, but he only points out the side he doesn't like, because he is a Pacquiao fan. I mean, seems to me he wants to read Pac by KO, and has no problem with that. He doesn't consider himself a Pep hater for thinking that way.

 

But the question does remain, how will Saddler take Pacquiao's power and speed. That's the question for any swarmer. I have seen a bit of Saddler. His chin was solid. But Pacquiao at 126 might crack it....it's not a given on either end IMO.

 

Do you feel Pacs speed would be the great equalizer in this matchup, or does saddler out endure him in a almost certain war of attrition?

 

:thinkDo the lightweights he beat compare power wise to Pac? if not, Pac can hurt him pretty bad but then Sandy can crack very hard as well.

Toss up match imho.

 

the thing is i respect their stand in this democratic internet. they are free to hallucinate or be delusional. it is their right. but i do believe we can also use our crystal ball and not theirs. let us just apply the law of reciprocity kg. as simple as that. look at el puma. this moron keeps on betting against pac since mab-pac days. now look at him. he is still delusional. do you think he got some credentials to be boxing smart ass wanna bee? hell no. but I still respect his stupidity. it is his choice. as long as he and the haters let me view my own I have no problem with that. :deal

 

Yes, but you have finally learned the error of your ways as the rest of us have. On a completley unrelated note, Pac ko1 Frank Shamrock 10/10

 

Well Saddler may very well smother Pacquiao's power. And we are unsure of Pacquiao's power against guys Saddler's size. IMO, Pacquiao's power has diminished at each weight since 122, where he was a one punch guy.

 

The styles matchup usually favors the puncher over the swarmer, unless the swarmer has the defense or the all out power to take the puncher out without taking too much in return. I'm one of few who believes a prime Tyson would beat a prime Foreman for that reason.

A straight forward swarmer though is often taken out by the brutal puncher, because he is too often within range of the puncher. The argument you're presenting is: Would Pac be able to crack Saddler before Saddler cracked Pep? I don't think so at all because Saddler, while being the harder hitter(Pac's power is a lot more of a combo of speed and relentlessness than pure power like a Hamed), would neutralize Pac's game on the inside.

Saddler was one of the best at tying up his opponent and using rough, even dirty tactics on the inside. When you got within range of him, you were in range of his huge reach to get clinched, or hit with a huge punch. Fighting Saddler on the inside, or coming to Saddler, were about the worst things to do. Foreman destroyed swarmers because of his power, though he didn't have many dimensions to his game. When you got in range, he would just pummel you. Saddler would keep you within range by clinching and digging into your ribs with body punches, slowing you down, which is why he was able to get Pep out of their in 4, because Pep didn't fight off the backfoot, he used lateral movement.

I think a strong defensive, powerful swarmer like Tyson could beat a pure puncher like Foreman due to the skill difference, but a straight forward swarmer like Pacquiao, Frazier, Marciano, etc would lose to the big punchers IMO, especially one like Saddler, who was capable of keeping you within his reach.

 

It has as with any other great fighter before him, you can only take that power so high. Julian Jackson at 160 comes to mind.

Sandy is as tall as Morales, easily as tough and can not only crack cement (not literally Sour pee) but has a better inside game.

 

Pac's speed would only be a concern for Saddler if he were to use it to box him, and to try and pot-shot. That is most certainly not Pac's game, and even someone like Johnco would have to admit that.

You'd have to box Saddler brilliantly to beat him. I may even favor Saddler over Armstrong at 126.

 

I have never had an issue with El Puma. But lets be real and honest here. Reciprocity? You realize that you have jumped all over others for the same things that you defend Pacquiao for. You don't apply the same rules across the board. There are many here who you have simply insulted for no reason other than they didn't pick Pacquiao to win, and I think you know that.

It's not delusional to think that Pep would beat Pacquiao. How much do you know about Pep?

And credential's aren't relevant really. You happen to back a fighter who wins alot. When he loses, will you lose your credentials? Or, a better example is your "bragging rights" counter you like to use, because Pacquiao wins. Does this mean you DON'T have bragging rights against Unbeatable Floyd or any other PBF fans, since he is unbeaten?

The fighter you like winning and you picking him because you like him doesn't make you knowledgable, nor does it do the same for anyone else here. And if he loses, it's doesn't make you stupid.