[quoteq="Ambling Alp II"]
elmersalsa wrote:Ambling Alp II wrote:He was very lucky to win these fights. There is a lot of people who thought he did not deserve them. Even if you think he won qthem all, you have to admit that they a
Q re[img]q%20was[/img] were :geek2: very close. He certainly did not dominate these guys.
As for elmer's other comments: I agree that you can only fight opponents who are around during your era. Pedroza simply did not do that. Pedroza missed quite a few top guys. He did not fight Sanchez, Lopez, Gomez, Castillo, or Nelson.
How do I know that he only defended 7 Top 10 Challengers? I am going by the Ring Magazine Hall of Fame Record Book. It's a little more reliable than the WBA, or any of the WBS organizations.
No, 20 title defenses (by itself) does not automatically mean you are dominant.
As Keith touched on, who you beat is important. Any decent fighter can always find opponents who have little chance against him.
Did he beat all of the best? Clearly no. Did he almost always win in dominant fashion against the best fighters that he did fight? Clearly no. The best fighters that he did actually defend against (LaPorte, Taylor, and Lickrodge) all gave him very close fights.
Lastly, on elmer's own criteria for #1, he mentioned winning titles on every level as the other factor. Pedroza clearly missed out on this. By his own criteria, he was not dominant.
He keeps ignoring this point, as he always does when he is cornered.
What this shows is that elmer is completely biased. He laid out his criteria for the Hall of Fame, (after I asked him) one of his favorite fighters does not meet very much of the criteria, so he goes into spin mode. It's very easy to see through.
I agree that Ambling Alp is a very great competitor like I am. I give him credit.
The Ring Magazine has their own rankings. It is not the WBA nor WBC rankings. I need MORE PROOF that only of 7 out of 20, were top ten challengers. The great Eusebio Pedroza NEVER GOT THE EASY WAY OUT. HE TOOK ALL COMERS, ACCORDING BY HIS WBA MANDATORY CHALLENGES. HE EVEN DID IT, MOST IMPRESSIVELY, ON THE ROAD, 10 TIMES, 10 TIMES in the opponents' home turf. That is hard to do. To defend your crown in someone's turf.
The great Salvador Sanchez, Danny Lopez nor the great Azumah Nelson, did not looked at Pedroza's way. If Pedroza was a weak champion, why they did not unify the titles. Pedroza called them. Not even the great Wilfredo Gomez challenged Pedroza. I wonder why. Was he ducked by those guys? It could be a possibility. He was too hard of a risk, and not a champion liked by the US media. He was not in the superstar radar, but, he was as good as anyone in the 80s decade. It is the same thing that happened to Brian Mitchell at jr. lightweight. Too risky and not much money or marketable for the tv masses. Especially, US masses.
Pedroza is one of the best featherweight fighters ever. He is top 10 in my book. What a champion.
I don't consider you a great competitor. You are completely biased, usually ignore the person's points, and don't use logic.
We all disagree on things from time to time, but most others aren't so biased, don't ignore opposing points as often, and usually use more logic.
All you do is come up with random irrelevant information to support a guy you like or rip someone you don't like.
Don't really care how much proof you need. Ring Magazine is not perfect, but it is a lot more legitimate than the WBA or WBC.
Have you really never noticed how silly their ratings often are? They are often rigged. ie a WBA title fight will be set up. Suddenly the unknown challenger is ranked highly so that the fight looks more legitimate than it is. Or a WBC title fight is set up. The WBA will rate that challenger lower so the WBC title fight won't seem as interesting.
The WBC, IBF, WBO has done the same things. They won't even rate the champions of other organizations.
I love first you say Pedroza fought everyone. Then when I point out several top opponents that he never fought, all of a sudden they "never looked his way". Please.
It never occurred to you that Pedroza never "looked their way"?
Not marketable for the US masses? Please. He was on national TV in the United States many times. He got plenty of exposure. You don't think a network would have televised a fight between Pedroza and Sanchez or Gomez? Or Castillo, Nelson or Lopez?
I am not a Pedroza hater. Don't care about him either way. I was just pointing out that on your own criteria he does not look that good. Of course since you are so biased towards him, you have to spin things so that it looks like he fits your criteria better.[/quote]
I see an Angry Ambling Alp, here.
First, you have not shown me the Ring ratings of the time.
Secondly, every organization got their ratings and whoever they think is the number one challenger, that is their criteria. They do not give a damn what The Ring thinks. Is it corruption by the alphabet organizations? In most cases, yes.
Now, you are saying that the Ring magazine is not perfect. What make you think that they are MORE LEGIT than the WBA or WBC? Nobody's perfect. I sometimes question The Ring ratings, myself.
Third, every world champion has mandatory challenges. If not, the organization strips his title. Pedroza did as told. Went by the rules of the WBA. He didn't even had an American promoter. Why? Because the promoters believed that he wasn't MARKETABLE. Too much risk, and not enough money to make a multimillion dollar fight. You don't think that Pedroza wanted a multi-million dollar fight? Excuse me? Every champion wish to fight for millions. He challenged the great Salvador Sanchez. He challenged the great Azumah Nelson. He even called them out many II SD cds u times. What they did? LOOKED THE OTHER WAY....THAT'S THE TRUTH. If you can't handle it, fine, I could live with that.
Fourth, Pedroza defended the crown ALL OVER THE WORLD. A TRUE MEANING AND DEFINITION OF THE WORD WORLD CHAMPION. The parties of the challenger and the champion NEGOTIATE with the WBA in a bid, where would the fight takes place. If the place of whoever fits best for their best interests comes, they'll conclude with the agreement and the WBA sanctioned it.
Fifth, YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!