Sandy Saddler

wirey,tall, bruiser, slugger, grappler. an awkward style as he would use a light jab to move foreward but was there to pummel you. he would move in close then hit you, then grab you, turn you around, throw an elbow, a low blow, an uppercut, barge you against the ropes.

he was a clincher but by all acounts was an exciting clincher.

very very hard punch mixed with his hieght and herky jerky syle was a perfect style to beat pep.
pep was a smooth boxer who prided himself on not being hit. but when the guy grabs you and smacks you in the ribs then crushes you and elbows you then sets you up with a right hand and a left hook then your bound to get smacked.


i heard he was a tough tough guy mentally he came from the bad side of town would be an understatement.

 

he was a great fighter for sure but the 2nd greatest feather is a very stong claim. i think he could beat a ton of champs from feather to lightwieght easily. h ecould get countered and outskilled but he was no mug.

his best attributes were prolly his size 5'10 maybe 5'11 but that would be pushing it, mixed with his aggresive-inside style and his dirty tactics.
you rarely see tall fighters choosing to slug it out but especailly when he was dirty fighter the sugar ray clay jones jr gene was not in ihs bloodstream.

it was this mix of attributes that made a fighter that cant be outboxed easily nor can he be out slugged.


if he were around today i think prolly marquez could take him due to his one the move style he has picked up.
paquiao would just land slap bang into hell his outside work will be smothered and his left hand would be no use on the inside due to southpaw disadvantages. and that sanders would just engulf him.

buit his style would be looked down upon. a clincher is the worst label you can anme a fighter now....people even sayin gthey shoudl ban clinching!!!

 

similar but diego was a puncher who had a short reach. as tall as he was it didnt make him a boxer or a slugger he just needed to be aggresive to land punches becuase of his reach defeciet.

diego was there to place that 1 shot or 3 shot combo which he cant get if he smothers his own work by clinching and grappling.

 

No, much better than Diego. Diego had power like Saddler, but nothing else, that was were Diego was extremely limited. Saddler would tie you up and work you on the inside with his long limbs whenever you got withing range. He'd tie you up to the point that you were neutralized, but he was still very effective. One of the best in fighters ever. He was also not a very good outboxer, similar to Diego, but he had ways of getting you within his reach and power a lot better than Diego.

 

who can you think of had a style like his:think

tall but grapply

 

Yep. But, he'd have more trouble with someone who used ring movement/fought off the backfoot than he would an upperbody mover, as he didn't rely on accurate punches to catch you with, he relied on tying you up and bringing you into his game. With upperbody or head movement, you weren't really out of danger most of the time, but with foot movement, you would be better off, depending on how you utilized it.

As far as destroying any fighter that would come to him, I'd take him to beat Armstrong at FW, if that counts as a yes. I'd have him losing to someone like Floyd at 130 though.

 

Pedroza was a tall, skilled, dirty inside fighter, similar to Saddler in ways, but not as much of a grappler, and speedier probably.

 

That view is ridiculous. It depends on how far back you go. If someone tells you a fighter from the 60's is primitive, show them Al, Napoles, Jofre, show them Robinson, Gavilan, etc from the 50's, Pep, Armstrong, even in the 30's and 40's, Ross, etc.

It's ridiculous. When we start getting into the early 1900's however, then it starts making sense. All you have to do is watch footage to be able to tell, if you understand boxing. Saddler wouldn't been a handful in any era.

 

Great fighter but overrated head to head, was beaten cleany by many fighters during his prime.

 

Well, of course their were pioneers, it's not like they all just clicked in 1940. But that general area is also what I believe, around the 30's and 40's on.