Weird fight, I imagine Sanchez weaving in and out of Saddlers range whilst delivering hard blows. However theres a part of me that thinks Saddler could be so rough that it could cause problems. Lanky arms, inhuman punch strength, constant stamina, tough as nails, theres a reason Pep only won 1/4 times. Just a thought I had
It's hard to imagine Sal winning since he didn't have that feet-based movement to survive like Pep or Elorde,but Saddler kinda struggles with Charley Riley who pressured him. Sal's got to get rough
Sanchez has a shot against Saddler because Sandy is never going to knock him out. I would pick Sanchez in this matchup.
It depends if Sanchez fought Saddler in his era where he's allowed to foul more and make it his type of fight then i favour Saddler. If Saddler fought Sanchez in his era though with a more modern rule set where Saddler wouldn't be able to get away with half the stuff he would in the older era then i favour Sanchez.
Sandy for me, Sal beat a big puncher in Lopez, but Little Red did not have the defence or chin of Saddler.
Pedroza got away with anything and everything in Sal’s era, so I’m not sure how that would work. When Salvador fought Patrick Ford, a tall and rangy guy like himself, he really struggled. I think he would have more difficulty with Sandy, who was way better all around and definitely had more power and overall offense than Patrick. I’ll go with Saddler W15 UD.
Saddler didn't fight anything like Ford who fought a smart tactical fight at range. Saddler was an aggressive fighter with an ugly style that was known to foul alot in fights nothing remotely like Ford in regards to styles. Pep would outbox Saddler when he used movement and boxed on the outside which Sanchez was very good at doing its when he had to chase an opponent he struggled he wouldn't have to do that vs Saddler. Also Saddler mauled Pep on the inside he would clinch and hit him with a free hand again would he allow to get away with such rough tactics vs Sanchez in modern era ? Debatable. As I said with a more modern rule set I'd favour Sanchez I'm not a lover of Saddler's style at all honestly.
His bull was similar and it’s not like Saddler fought like Henry Armstrong as a swarmer. For sure, no matter how you cut it, Sanchez never saw anything remotely like Saddler in his career. And Azumah, though he had a much different build, stayed in the pocket and worked short- and mid-range vs Sal and certainly found success. As far as Pep, Saddler stopped him 3 out of 4 meetings. KO’d cold in the first one and easily so. Yes, he boxed brilliantly in the one fight he won in the trilogy but don’t tell me he never tried to box in the others … Saddler just tracked him down and beat him down. And what makes you think Saddler couldn’t get away with rough tactics in the ‘modern era’ while Pedroza — a contemporary of Sanchez — did get away with it to extremes?
Because Saddler's rough house tactics were more extreme and I don't think his style of fighting would be as accepted with more modern rules. Out of all the ATGs Saddler is probably one of the most dirtiest fighters and this fight would basically be down to the era they fought in and how lenient the referee is. If the referee allows Saddler to fight his fight on the inside then I favour Saddler but if he doesn't then I favour Sanchez. There's alot of different circumstances that could decide the winner.
Again, Pedroza got away with murder. And Saddler was no dirtier than Pep. Go read the accounts. He was as responsible for the roughhousing in their last two fights as Saddler was. You mentioned punching with the free hand above as if that’s a foul. That’s exactly what you’re supposed to do when one hand is tied up.
As I've said it would depend on the era and the referee its as simple as that. There's no definitive answer to this match up.
