Eusebio Pedroza and "luck."

[Rover]

This post was inspired by something I read earlier today that implied that Pedroza was lucky in his career and that the WBA helped him out.
First, Pedroza was a road warrior. He only won one defense by decision in Panama (v. Lujan), and he won that clearly.
For the rest of his decision defenses, they were either on the opponent's home turf or, in the case of Lockridge II and Caba, in a neutral land.
Pedroza deserved the first Lockridge fight. In spite of the views of Tim Ryan and Gil Clancy, as Dick Stockton pointed out, though the crowd had Lockridge winning, the people at ringside (I assume he was referring to the press) had it for Pedroza. I think that that fight also was tarnished by Rodolfo Hill's ridiculous 149-139 scorecard.
Pedroza-Laporte: The New Jersey State Athletic Commission sure showed its bias in this one. Whether or not to disqualify a fighter is up to the ref's discretion. Yet, six months after the fight, the NJSAC decided to "overturn" the decision.
(Though I have always wondered how it was decided to keep it as a win on Pedroza's record.)
Bernard Taylor: I don't know about media scores for that fight, though I'd be interested in neutral ones (not from Panama or the U.S.) I had it 145-142 for Pedroza, who swept the last 4 rounds to get the job done.
I think some of the rap on Pedroza comes from the fact that he was a foreign champ fighting American fighters in their backyards, and American media were providing the coverage. But a great fighter he was, and he deserved his victories.

[Crease]

Eusebio Pedroza was a great fighter in his day, and that can never be taken away from him.
I would state that he was definitely in the top 10 Pound-For-Pound list of his era, but that's only my opinion.

And I still say that Pedroza vs Azumah Nelson is one of the great wars that we never seen.
:(

[Seamus]

I had Lockridge clearly beating Pedroza in the 1st bout and I had Taylor winning as well, though it was a pretty dull fight.

[Rover]

Eusebio Pedroza was a great fighter in his day, and that can never be taken away from him.
I would state that he was definitely in the top 10 Pound-For-Pound list of his era, but that's only my opinion.

And I still say that Pedroza vs Azumah Nelson is one of the great wars that we never seen.
:(

Pedroza was past-prime by then. He looked unimpressive against the pedestrian Mayor in May of 84. I think Nelson would've beaten Pedroza that December night had Eusebio been in the ring instead of Wilfredo.
Now, prime-for-prime, that's a different story.
But keep in mind that McGuigan, who wasn't in Nelson's league, beat Pedroza just 6 months later.

[boxbible]

Pedroza's masterful slipping, sliding and rolling was lost on American viewers. Punches may have looked like they landed on Pedroza, but in slo-mo, you see they just rolled off him as he slid with the punch to take away all its effect, and then come back with short counters.

Lockridge threw a lot of big looking shots and had Pedroza up against the ropes a lot, but didn't land much at all. Meanwhile, Pedroza was tattooing Rocky with little counter uppercuts and hooks on the inside.

[Nile4000]

As much as I liked Eusebio, I thought Bernard beating him 144-141.Eusebio waited a bit too late to mount his charge.

[elmersalsa]

Eusebio Pedroza was one of the most underrated fighters of his day. In my view, I don't think the greats Salvador Sanchez, Azumah Nelson nor Wilfredo Gomez wanted no part of him. The reason? Too much at risk and not enough money. Hey, if I would have been fighting those days, I probably would have avoided him the best I could. He was a great fighter tarnished by the American media as a "dirty fighter". That cost him big paydays. But aside from that, no world champion in boxing history has defended his crown in opponents backyards more than Pedroza. He did it a record 10 times! And I think that record would not be broken.

Pedroza was a complete and intelligent boxer. He knew the fine points of the art of boxing and had many tricks in the bag. Plus, he was very tall for a featherweight, could fight well on the inside, great stamina, great speed of hands and foot and had a terrific body attack. He could slip punches just by moving his head and give you terrific counters. He had it all, except the luck to fight the elite fighters of his day.

[Chuck1052]

At the time, I thought that Rocky Lockridge should have been given the decision in the first bout with Eusebio Pedroza, but I look at it differently now. A number of the rounds were close, so it is far from being outrageous that Pedroza got the decision. But one ring official scored the bout 149-139 in favor of Pedroza, which I still think is very unfair.

Pedroza was a terrific fighter who had plenty of skills. I remember that he had a windup somewhat similar to that of a bolo punch, but more compact, when punching to the body with either hand. Of course, I also remember when he was committing one foul after another in a bout with Juan Laporte. How Pedroza was able to avoid a disqualification in that bout is beyond me.

Before his peak period, Pedroza was stopped in an early round by Alfonso Zamora. How did that setback affect Pedroza's legacy? Of course, Zamora was a tremendous puncher, but didn't have much in the way of boxing skills.

- Chuck Johnston

[The End]

Interesting . I always thought of Pedroza as unlucky . Unlucky not to get the big fights and name recognition and Unlucky to not get mentioned in the all time p4p discussions.

[Rover]

At the time, I thought that Rocky Lockridge should have been given the decision in the first bout with Eusebio Pedroza, but I look at it differently now. A number of the rounds were close, so it is far from being outrageous that Pedroza got the decision. But one ring official scored the bout 149-139 in favor of Pedroza, which I still think is very unfair.

Pedroza was a terrific fighter who had plenty of skills. I remember that he had a windup somewhat similar to that of a bolo punch, but more compact, when punching to the body with either hand. Of course, I also remember when he was committing one foul after another in a bout with Juan Laporte. How Pedroza was able to avoid a disqualification in that bout is beyond me.

Before his peak period, Pedroza was stopped in an early round by Alfonso Zamora. How did that setback affect Pedroza's legacy? Of course, Zamora was a tremendous puncher, but didn't have much in the way of boxing skills.

- Chuck Johnston

Lots of fighters have early losses. Just look at Arguello. That 149-139 card for Pedroza was absurd.

[Counter-puncher]

He was a great fighter tarnished by the American media as a "dirty fighter".
.

he was rightfully tarnished. the American media didn't invent those multiple punches he bounced off guys cups.

[Ambling Alp]

I think it's fair to say that he was lucky in some ways and not in others. He was an great fighter and does get overlooked sometimes. On the other hand, he was in a lot of close fights and for whatever reason always seemed to get the benefit of the doubt.

[boxbible]

I think it's fair to say that he was lucky in some ways and not in others. He was an great fighter and does get overlooked sometimes. On the other hand, he was in a lot of close fights and for whatever reason always seemed to get the benefit of the doubt.

He was very close to the WBA and so was able to bring a couple of his own judges to each fight.

[Rover]

I think it's fair to say that he was lucky in some ways and not in others. He was an great fighter and does get overlooked sometimes. On the other hand, he was in a lot of close fights and for whatever reason always seemed to get the benefit of the doubt.

He was very close to the WBA and so was able to bring a couple of his own judges to each fight.

His own judges?
In the close Pedroza fights I can recall:
Lockridge I: one Panamanian judge, and there also was an American judge (Harold Lederman).
Taylor: No Panamanian judges.
Lockridge II: No Panamanian judges.

[boxbible]

His own judges?
In the close Pedroza fights I can recall:
Lockridge I: one Panamanian judge, and there also was an American judge (Harold Lederman).
Taylor: No Panamanian judges.
Lockridge II: No Panamanian judges.

Many Venezuelans. And the inexperienced ones the WBA hand picked knew who to score for.

[Rover]

No Venezuelans in the Taylor fight or Lockridge I or II.

[boxbible]

No Venezuelans in the Taylor fight or Lockridge I or II.

There were in a lot of his other fights.

I still think he won the Lockridge fights. The controversial one is where Lederman scored for Lockridge, but then again, Lederman likes the aggressive fighter. The Taylor fight could've gone either way. I don't remember being shocked by the decision.

OK... W15s Rocky Lockridge I:
Christodoulou (S Africa) 147-141 EP
Rodolfo Hill (Panama) 149-139 EP
Harold Lederman 144-142 RL

D15s Bernard Taylor:
Christodoulou (S Africa) 147-143 EP
Knud Jensen (Denmark) 146-144 BT
Oscar Oppen (US) 146-146

W15u Rocky Lockridge II:
Ove Oveson (Denmark) 146-145 EP
Juan Maio (Argentina) 147-146 EP
Yong Soo Chung (South Korea) 147-142 EP

So, he had hometown judge, Rodolfo Hill, in the second Lockridge fight. Knud Jensen and Yong Soo Chung were both working their fifth title appointments. Oscar Oppen, Juan Maio, and Ove Oveson were scoring their first ever title fights.

So, even in these fights, he did have his own judges more or less with the help of the WBA.

[Rover]

No Venezuelans in the Taylor fight or Lockridge I or II.

There were in a lot of his other fights.

I still think he won the Lockridge fights. The controversial one is where Lederman scored for Lockridge, but then again, Lederman likes the aggressive fighter. The Taylor fight could've gone either way. I don't remember being shocked by the decision.

OK... W15s Rocky Lockridge I:
Christodoulou (S Africa) 147-141 EP
Rodolfo Hill (Panama) 149-139 EP
Harold Lederman 144-142 RL

D15s Bernard Taylor:
Christodoulou (S Africa) 147-143 EP
Knud Jensen (Denmark) 146-144 BT
Oscar Oppen (US) 146-146

W15u Rocky Lockridge II:
Ove Oveson (Denmark) 146-145 EP
Juan Maio (Argentina) 147-146 EP
Yong Soo Chung (South Korea) 147-142 EP

So, he had hometown judge, Rodolfo Hill, in the second Lockridge fight. Knud Jensen and Yong Soo Chung were both working their fifth title appointments. Oscar Oppen, Juan Maio, and Ove Oveson were scoring their first ever title fights.

So, even in these fights, he did have his own judges more or less with the help of the WBA.

But there were no Venezuelans in the close decisions Pedroza got (and the Taylor fight).
There was a Panamanian and an American in Lockridge I (balance).
As for judges' experience, for some reason, the scoring resumes of judges isn't as detailed on Boxrec prior to 1980, so I don't know how experienced those judges were compared to other WBA judges.
And Hill was not in the second Lockridge fight; he was in the first one along with Lederman.
And this definitely was not Oveson's first title fight scoring. He was a judge in Pryor-Arguello I.

[boxbible]

Oveson... I was wondering because the name was so familiar.

But anyway, what I'm saying is that Pedroza's manager was reportedly very close with the WBA, and the WBA helped out with select officials.

Now, if Pedroza was going to make a voluntary defense in the other guy's backyard, he could pretty much dictate all the terms. And in a mandatory where the challenger's promoter won the right to promote, the WBA could still hand pick officials in Pedroza's favour. But, for a negotiated fight with a very good purse offer for Pedroza, the challenger's party could lobby for stricter, or more neutral, officiating and so forth.

I don't remember much about the Taylor fight because he's so boring, but in the first Lockridge fight, Christodoulou favoured Pedroza by a wide margin. And he did the same in the Taylor fight. But in the Caba fight, he had it the closest amongst the three judges. And against McGuigan, he had it as wide as the other judges. Christo is known for being straight up.

Lederman had it for Lockridge in the first fight, but then again, Lederman is well known for liking aggressive boxers. But the Panamanian judge, Rodolfo Hill, obviously doesn't like American food and brought in his own home cooking.

So, it looks like the networks and promoters went with all neutral judges in the Taylor and Lockridge II matchups. And everyone still can't figure out who won.

What can we draw from all this? I don't fuckin' know... :(

But its been nice arguing the point.

[Rover]

How'd non-American and non-Panamanian media view those fights? I know that UPI had the first Lockridge fight a draw. Dick Stockton also stated between the decision and the interviews that all the people at ringside (I assume the media?) had it for Pedroza. I heard (but don't know for sure) that Ring scored those fights for Pedroza. Any insight, Boxbible?