BoxRec

I'd like to scramble these four names, my top featherweights, and see who you all would pick to win each fight. My picks are below:

Willie Pep MD15 Henry Armstrong (a close one, but I believe a peak '46 Pep would be able to do what Barney Ross couldn't, and that's stay away for sustained periods and peck successfully from the outside)

Willie Pep UD15 Salvador Sanchez (Sanchez didn't always look that good against boxers, and Pep was the ultimate boxer; he'd negate Sanchez' own slick defensive abilities and have him leading out of his comfort zone - Sanchez could fight on the offensive very well - but against Danny Lopez)

Willie Pep UD15 Sandy Saddler (Pep was a bit less mobile by the time Saddler got to him than he was back in his prime, before that crash... I'm confident that at the peak of his powers Pep could have worked hard for the decision)

Salvador Sanchez UD15 Henry Armstrong (I believe Sanchez had all the right tools to beat Armstrong; his stamina was incredible, surely able to keep up with Hank. Accurate fists, granite jaw, calmness under pressure, tidy footwork and an array of counter punching skills)

Henry Armstrong D15 Sandy Saddler (this one really is that close. Potentially the greatest fight of all time, and definitely one of the most savage. They both just match up so well in each category)

Salvador Sanchez UD15 Sandy Saddler (again, as with Armstrong, Sanchez had just the right style to beat Saddler. Sharp jab to get through Saddler's leaky defense, the durability, mentality & stamina to take Saddler's best, and the versatility to adapt when required)

There is not a one-sided matchup here at all though... All extremely close and competitive.

What's your take?

To be honest with fighters of that quality it's too hard to pick a winner unless there's something in one figher's style that means they would always have a big advantage over the other (as with say Foreman Frazier). Untill MIT stop dragging their feet on the technology that will allow us to bring fighters back from the dead and match them up for our own amusement it's too close to call.

The only pick I'd be even a little confident on would be Pep to outpoint Sanchez.

Willie Pep VS Henry Armstrong- Pep would be on the defensive all night and i'm not sure his power would gain too much of homicide Hanks respect. Armstrong UD15.

Willie Pep UD15 Salvador Sanchez- Agreed

Willie Pep UD15 Sandy Saddler- Agreed

Salvador Sanchez VS Henry Armstrong- This one I disagree with the most. Armstrong would be Nelson taken up a notch or two. Sanchez would put up a good fight and easily survive getting ko'd but loss a clear cut decison.

Henry Armstrong VS Sandy Saddler- Hanks face would look like a pumpkin at the end but I think he out works Saddler. Armstrong UD 15.

theone wrote:Willie Pep VS Henry Armstrong- Pep would be on the defensive all night and i'm not sure his power would gain too much of homicide Hanks respect. Armstrong UD15.

Willie Pep UD15 Salvador Sanchez- Agreed

Willie Pep UD15 Sandy Saddler- Agreed

Salvador Sanchez VS Henry Armstrong- This one I disagree with the most. Armstrong would be Nelson taken up a notch or two. Sanchez would put up a good fight and easily survive getting ko'd but loss a clear cut decison.

Henry Armstrong VS Sandy Saddler- Hanks face would look like a pumpkin at the end but I think he out works Saddler. Armstrong UD 15.

What don't you think Sanchez had that was required to beat Armstrong?

Decagon wrote:I don't see how Pep could get enough done while dealing with Armstrong's attack.

The same way I see Armstrong finding it hard to catch Pep and mount a sustained attack.

What don't you think Sanchez had that was required to beat Armstrong?

For a fighter to defeat prime Armstrong, not only would the fighter have to be exceptionally well rounded like Sanchez was, they would also have to have one or two attributes that were absolutely top shelf.
For instance, If Sanchez possessed either Peps's flawless defense, Saddlers crippling power or Mayweather like blinding speed, then I could maybe see him pulling out a victory over Armstrong.

Actually from Welterweight on down, the only fighter I could picture beating peak Armstrong is Sugar Ray Robinson.

theone wrote:

What don't you think Sanchez had that was required to beat Armstrong?

For a fighter to defeat prime Armstrong, not only would the fighter have to be exceptionally well rounded like Sanchez was, they would also have to have one or two attributes that were absolutely top shelf.
For instance, If Sanchez possessed either Peps's flawless defense, Saddlers crippling power or Mayweather like blinding speed, then I could maybe see him pulling out a victory over Armstrong.

Actually from Welterweight on down, the only fighter I could picture beating peak Armstrong is Sugar Ray Robinson.

Sanchez' poise, stamina and durability were top shelf. Nobody could ruffle his feathers, an amazing endurance fighter. Check out a youthful Azumah Nelson, full of vitality and life, get slowly broken down over fifteen rounds. His balance was non existant by the end. Sanchez, although not a big hitter, was a damaging fighter, like Carlos Monzon. Check out the smashed cheekbone and mice under the eyes of Wilfredo Gomez, and Nelson & Danny Lopez' mashed faces. Armstrong would make the fight close but I can see Sanchez matching him exchange-for-exchange the whole fight but keeping just one step ahead through superior fighting on the retreat.

Decagon wrote:Based on what? Armstrong had excellent offensive footwork, the equal of Roberto Duran's. He knew how to cut off the ring, and he'd be able to beat Pep doing so.

Ahem.

Decagon wrote:I don't see how Pep could get enough done while dealing with Armstrong's attack.

Based on what? 8)

It's speculation, and we are just looking at it from different perspectives. This time I am saying Pep could get enough work done to take the decision. For all Armstrong's effectiveness on the front foot, Pep matched him, but on the defensive side of things. Pep's unorthodox counter punches and sheer mobility, as well as ring sense, would confuse Armstrong to an extent and allow Pep just enough time to keep pecking away and score points.

DoubleM wrote:I'd like to scramble these four names, my top featherweights, and see who you all would pick to win each fight. My picks are below:

Willie Pep MD15 Henry Armstrong (a close one, but I believe a peak '46 Pep would be able to do what Barney Ross couldn't, and that's stay away for sustained periods and peck successfully from the outside)

Willie Pep UD15 Salvador Sanchez (Sanchez didn't always look that good against boxers, and Pep was the ultimate boxer; he'd negate Sanchez' own slick defensive abilities and have him leading out of his comfort zone - Sanchez could fight on the offensive very well - but against Danny Lopez)

Willie Pep UD15 Sandy Saddler (Pep was a bit less mobile by the time Saddler got to him than he was back in his prime, before that crash... I'm confident that at the peak of his powers Pep could have worked hard for the decision)

Salvador Sanchez UD15 Henry Armstrong (I believe Sanchez had all the right tools to beat Armstrong; his stamina was incredible, surely able to keep up with Hank. Accurate fists, granite jaw, calmness under pressure, tidy footwork and an array of counter punching skills)

Henry Armstrong D15 Sandy Saddler (this one really is that close. Potentially the greatest fight of all time, and definitely one of the most savage. They both just match up so well in each category)

Salvador Sanchez UD15 Sandy Saddler (again, as with Armstrong, Sanchez had just the right style to beat Saddler. Sharp jab to get through Saddler's leaky defense, the durability, mentality & stamina to take Saddler's best, and the versatility to adapt when required)

There is not a one-sided matchup here at all though... All extremely close and competitive.

What's your take?

Good picks. My own are similar but here's how I differ.

Armstrong WMD 15 Pep

Saddler D 15 Pep (can't split them if we go for pre-crash Pep)

Saddler WSD15 Armstrong

Decagon wrote:Based on Armstrong's punch output and ability to cut off the ring. Weren't you paying attention?

The smart arse persona doesn't suit you. You said "based on what" yet I can say exactly the same back to you. You say punch output and ability to cut off the ring, I say agility and ring sense.

Ezzard wrote:

DoubleM wrote:I'd like to scramble these four names, my top featherweights, and see who you all would pick to win each fight. My picks are below:

Willie Pep MD15 Henry Armstrong (a close one, but I believe a peak '46 Pep would be able to do what Barney Ross couldn't, and that's stay away for sustained periods and peck successfully from the outside)

Willie Pep UD15 Salvador Sanchez (Sanchez didn't always look that good against boxers, and Pep was the ultimate boxer; he'd negate Sanchez' own slick defensive abilities and have him leading out of his comfort zone - Sanchez could fight on the offensive very well - but against Danny Lopez)

Willie Pep UD15 Sandy Saddler (Pep was a bit less mobile by the time Saddler got to him than he was back in his prime, before that crash... I'm confident that at the peak of his powers Pep could have worked hard for the decision)

Salvador Sanchez UD15 Henry Armstrong (I believe Sanchez had all the right tools to beat Armstrong; his stamina was incredible, surely able to keep up with Hank. Accurate fists, granite jaw, calmness under pressure, tidy footwork and an array of counter punching skills)

Henry Armstrong D15 Sandy Saddler (this one really is that close. Potentially the greatest fight of all time, and definitely one of the most savage. They both just match up so well in each category)

Salvador Sanchez UD15 Sandy Saddler (again, as with Armstrong, Sanchez had just the right style to beat Saddler. Sharp jab to get through Saddler's leaky defense, the durability, mentality & stamina to take Saddler's best, and the versatility to adapt when required)

There is not a one-sided matchup here at all though... All extremely close and competitive.

What's your take?

Good picks. My own are similar but here's how I differ.

Armstrong WMD 15 Pep

Saddler D 15 Pep (can't split them if we go for pre-crash Pep)

Saddler WSD15 Armstrong

To go into a deeper analysis, how would you say the Saddler-Armstrong fight would go down, Ezzard? It's obviously very close between the two; I would say Armstrong was a bit stronger and faster with possibly a better defence, and fought at a faster pace. Saddler was slightly harder punching and more versatile, with the advantage in reach. Some might say that long arms are useless against Armstrong because he'll get inside anyway, and you'd rather have short arms to work on the inside against him, but with Saddler, he was already deadly at close range. His superior reach would definitely be an advantage here, even if he could land only one shot each time Armstrong attempts to come in. Both men score 10/10 for body punching, durability, stamina and experience. I don't think aspects like 'heart' or footwork are worth mentioning here... We know both fighters would battle to the death and neither of them are going to dance or even need to cut the ring down.

I'm not sure if Armstrong could wear his opponent out in this fight, Saddler had top stamina too and paced himself depending on the situation. I don't think there would be a knock out, bar an ugly stoppage from a severe cut - but using a '40s referee I think we can rule that out. Armstrong would take the offensive as usual, but I'm unsure what Saddler would be doing. Maybe he'd sit back and potshot Armstrong (who, admittedly, could be quite predictable) on the way in, shifting back every now and then to give himself the right space, then standing his ground as they meet at close range and fighting back on the inside with the uppercuts to the body. If Armstrong was to win, it'd be through his punch output and underrated accuracy. I think his fast hands & feet could catch Saddler unawares at times, although Saddler's power and sheer ability to damage his opponent (legally or illegally) may eventually slow Armstrong down towards the end of the fight where an until-then conserved and now fresher Saddler could step up the pace and take advantage.

DoubleM wrote:I'd like to scramble these four names, my top featherweights, and see who you all would pick to win each fight. My picks are below:

Willie Pep MD15 Henry Armstrong (a close one, but I believe a peak '46 Pep would be able to do what Barney Ross couldn't, and that's stay away for sustained periods and peck successfully from the outside)

Willie Pep UD15 Salvador Sanchez (Sanchez didn't always look that good against boxers, and Pep was the ultimate boxer; he'd negate Sanchez' own slick defensive abilities and have him leading out of his comfort zone - Sanchez could fight on the offensive very well - but against Danny Lopez)

Willie Pep UD15 Sandy Saddler (Pep was a bit less mobile by the time Saddler got to him than he was back in his prime, before that crash... I'm confident that at the peak of his powers Pep could have worked hard for the decision)

Salvador Sanchez UD15 Henry Armstrong (I believe Sanchez had all the right tools to beat Armstrong; his stamina was incredible, surely able to keep up with Hank. Accurate fists, granite jaw, calmness under pressure, tidy footwork and an array of counter punching skills)

Henry Armstrong D15 Sandy Saddler (this one really is that close. Potentially the greatest fight of all time, and definitely one of the most savage. They both just match up so well in each category)

Salvador Sanchez UD15 Sandy Saddler (again, as with Armstrong, Sanchez had just the right style to beat Saddler. Sharp jab to get through Saddler's leaky defense, the durability, mentality & stamina to take Saddler's best, and the versatility to adapt when required)

There is not a one-sided matchup here at all though... All extremely close and competitive.

What's your take?

Nice picks For some reason I think i'd go with Armstrong over Pep although I completely agree it'd be a very close match up. Although I feel Sanchez would be able to decision Armstrong with his superb "top shelf" counter punching skills, I think Armstrong's relentless pressure would be a bit too much for Pep ultimately ending in a decision for Armstrong. Great picks though, I can see Pep edging out a decision against Armstrong as well though, I just feel styles make fights, and while Pep might be Sanchez, Armstrong might beat Pep. These four all would have very competitive fights. Which could go either way, but in terms of who is more likely to win, I just feel Armstrong might have what it takes to defeat the defensive wiz named Pep.

Thanks. For me, these are the closest and most competitive top four matchups of any division. Although the lightweights come close.

DoubleM wrote:Thanks. For me, these are the closest and most competitive top four matchups of any division. Although the lightweights come close.

Agreed.. these are possibly the most competitive match ups i've seen in awhile. Lightweight match ups would be very very interesting.

vagabundo55 wrote:

DoubleM wrote:Thanks. For me, these are the closest and most competitive top four matchups of any division. Although the lightweights come close.

Agreed.. these are possibly the most competitive match ups i've seen in awhile. Lightweight match ups would be very very interesting.

Who would be your top four lightweights? Head-to-head ability, that is.

DoubleM wrote: To go into a deeper analysis, how would you say the Saddler-Armstrong fight would go down, Ezzard? It's obviously very close between the two; I would say Armstrong was a bit stronger and faster with possibly a better defence, and fought at a faster pace. Saddler was slightly harder punching and more versatile, with the advantage in reach. Some might say that long arms are useless against Armstrong because he'll get inside anyway, and you'd rather have short arms to work on the inside against him, but with Saddler, he was already deadly at close range. His superior reach would definitely be an advantage here, even if he could land only one shot each time Armstrong attempts to come in. Both men score 10/10 for body punching, durability, stamina and experience. I don't think aspects like 'heart' or footwork are worth mentioning here... We know both fighters would battle to the death and neither of them are going to dance or even need to cut the ring down.

I'm not sure if Armstrong could wear his opponent out in this fight, Saddler had top stamina too and paced himself depending on the situation. I don't think there would be a knock out, bar an ugly stoppage from a severe cut - but using a '40s referee I think we can rule that out. Armstrong would take the offensive as usual, but I'm unsure what Saddler would be doing. Maybe he'd sit back and potshot Armstrong (who, admittedly, could be quite predictable) on the way in, shifting back every now and then to give himself the right space, then standing his ground as they meet at close range and fighting back on the inside with the uppercuts to the body. If Armstrong was to win, it'd be through his punch output and underrated accuracy. I think his fast hands & feet could catch Saddler unawares at times, although Saddler's power and sheer ability to damage his opponent (legally or illegally) may eventually slow Armstrong down towards the end of the fight where an until-then conserved and now fresher Saddler could step up the pace and take advantage.

I think that's a good summation of how I see the fight. Saddler has to make Armstrong take one each time he wants to get in close. Saddler was strong and durable, and would be firing back all the way.

Of course these are all tough match ups and there's not much in it either way. How about matching Pedroza, Nelson, Arguello and Barerra at 126?

DoubleM wrote:

vagabundo55 wrote:

DoubleM wrote:Thanks. For me, these are the closest and most competitive top four matchups of any division. Although the lightweights come close.

Agreed.. these are possibly the most competitive match ups i've seen in awhile. Lightweight match ups would be very very interesting.

Who would be your top four lightweights? Head-to-head ability, that is.

Hmm.. Narrowed down to four, i'd have to give it some thought.

Sanchez' poise, stamina and durability were top shelf. Nobody could ruffle his feathers, an amazing endurance fighter. Check out a youthful Azumah Nelson, full of vitality and life, get slowly broken down over fifteen rounds.

Armstrong at the very least equaled Sanchez in stamina, durability and endurance. He also fought and defeated many fighters who possed these attributes at a high level as well. Armstrong was stronger, more powerful, and had a higher punch output than Sanchez.
Sanchez poise would serve him well in surving the fight, but I dont think he hit hard enough or was fast enough for it to help him effectively nullify Armstrongs relentless high energy attack.
Nelson may have been full of vitality and life, but the facts remains he was still green and gave Sanchez a hell of a fight. No fighter had more vitality and life than prime Armstrong. I really dont think there is a fighter in history from Welter on down, other than Sugar Ray Robinson, who would have beaten Armstrong more often than not.

Decagon, can you give me some examples of a slick, fleet footed defensive master losing to a quick, hard punching brawler?

Theone - who did Armstrong beat who possessed the same combination of stamina, durability and collectiveness?

Armstrong had a great chin but could definitely be hurt - and Sanchez, while not a massive puncher, could really hurt a fighter. It was his accuracy. I genuinely believe Sanchez could hold his own at close range with Armstrong - he was good at ducking, hit hard to the body when provoked, and was pretty quick-fisted and strong. I believe it's Sanchez' versatility that is the deciding factor; he'll be a slight step behind at close range but have an easier time of it when fighting from the outside. He won't get a lot of time to stay there, but the one-twos would hit Armstrong coming in.
Apparently Sanchez' breathing was measured when he was champion and it turned out his breathing pattern, in the middle of a solid paced fight, had returned to normal after just 37 or 38 seconds - when most reasonably conditioned fighters would still be catching their breath when the next bell rang. Notice in between rounds how Sanchez' mouth was always closed. If it was anyone else, like Kid Chocolate, who couldn't match Armstrong for stamina, then I'd be picking Armstrong to win. But Sanchez matches Armstrong in all things physical; stamina, speed, durability. He probably wasn't as strong, but he was strong enough. More importantly, Sanchez was very calm and collected, remaining focused and technically sound right to the end of a fight. Armstrong wouldn't be able to wear Sanchez out and make him start dropping his defences, and that's why I think he'd lose.

DoubleM wrote:Decagon, can you give me some examples of a slick, fleet footed defensive master losing to a quick, hard punching brawler?.

Alfonso "Peppermint" Frazer vs Nicolino Locche, and to a lesser extent Ali Frazier, Robinson Lamotta, Leonard Duran.

Theone - who did Armstrong beat who possessed the same combination of stamina, durability and collectiveness?

Alot of fighters in that era possessed those traits chief amoung Armstrongs opponents were Barney Ross and Lou Ambers.

Armstrong wouldn't be able to wear Sanchez out and make him start dropping his defences, and that's why I think he'd lose.

He wouldnt have to wear him down. Sanchez would spend too much of the fight on defense and wouldnt mount sufficent offense to win.

J-C wrote:

DoubleM wrote:Decagon, can you give me some examples of a slick, fleet footed defensive master losing to a quick, hard punching brawler?.

Alfonso "Peppermint" Frazer vs Nicolino Locche, and to a lesser extent Ali Frazier, Robinson Lamotta, Leonard Duran.

None of those look like Pep-Armstrong would though. Pep moved more than all of those, and Armstrong threw more punches than them all.

Terence wrote:No offence mate but you make a terrible technical faux pas here, I think Decagon addressed this but here is my take.

I was not aware of Armstrong being a brawler. He was no Ricardo Mayorga. A brawler has little to no footwork, often staying rooted to the spot and throwing haymakers that you can easily counter, often with single left hooks and right hands.

Armstrong was a pressure fighter. These are guys with solid footwork who can cut a ring down and force the other fighter to open-up to score/keep them off and they then use this opening to make the most of their greater punch volume. Pressure fighters often have solid gyroscopic balance as well as a defence formed on attack and their constant upper body movement.

Armstrong could cut a ring down and unless Pep wanted him to wash all over him he would have to try and counter Henry only for Armstrong's prodigious flow to counter the counter. Duran had the same ability. Pressure fighters in fact need the other guy to be tight as he will absorb pressure and then try and get them with single picked shots. I see Armstrong out-landing Pep and mixing it up to take a points win.

Defensive masters do tend to struggle against top-level pressure fighters as the mix of movement and punching gives them problems. Defensive masters do better against one-shot hitters or out and out sluggers.

Armstrong was a pressure fight on the level of Frazier. Watch Frazier versus Bonavena for an example of pressure fighter versus slugger.

I had a feeling this would happen. Fear not, Terence, I'm well schooled on Armstrong and have studied his style lots, I own every filmed fight of his infact - he's one of my favourites. As I typed 'brawler' I knew someone would pick me up on it. By calling Armstrong a 'brawler' I refer to him as a fighter, and his mentality - not that he was skill-less and uncoordinated. Armstrong infact used a good jab at times, cut off the ring as you say, worked for angles, paced himself (believe it or not), and was very hard to hit cleanly. There was a lot of ringcraft going on in there. He was closer to Roberto Duran in terms of skill rather than Caveman Lee.

In a technical sense, I would class Armstrong as a swarmer. Again, by calling him a brawler, I didn't mean for you to think I rated Armstrong alongside Rocky Graziano and Stanley Ketchel. He was much better than those two.

theone wrote:Alot of fighters in that era possessed those traits chief amoung Armstrongs opponents were Barney Ross and Lou Ambers.

That's true. However - Barney Ross was forced on the defensive too much and his punches weren't even denting Armstrong. Sanchez would stand his ground more, although still moving, and he'd be punching with more authority. Ambers was a great lightweight, but I think Sanchez was just plain better. I think he was better than Ross, too. Ambers didn't move enough against Armstrong I thought, sometimes letting himself get caught with his back to the ropes and not ducking and defending as well as Sanchez would.

theone wrote:He wouldnt have to wear him down. Sanchez would spend too much of the fight on defense and wouldnt mount sufficent offense to win.

You think so? I don't. Sanchez didn't need to run all night, because he was strong & durable enough, as well as sufficiently skilled up close, to stand his ground more. I think his basic pattern in this fight would be move, box, fight, move, box, fight. Sanchez was well rounded & versatile, skilled and talented in all areas and he'd use it to his advantage here by mixing up his game depending on the situation.

DoubleM wrote:

J-C wrote:

DoubleM wrote:Decagon, can you give me some examples of a slick, fleet footed defensive master losing to a quick, hard punching brawler?.

Alfonso "Peppermint" Frazer vs Nicolino Locche, and to a lesser extent Ali Frazier, Robinson Lamotta, Leonard Duran.

None of those look like Pep-Armstrong would though. Pep moved more than all of those, and Armstrong threw more punches than them all.

Fair enough, but Armstrong and Pep are my picks for number 2 and 3 all time P4P, both were freaks of nature, so it's going to be hard to find an exact match.

J-C wrote:

DoubleM wrote:

J-C wrote: Alfonso "Peppermint" Frazer vs Nicolino Locche, and to a lesser extent Ali Frazier, Robinson Lamotta, Leonard Duran.

None of those look like Pep-Armstrong would though. Pep moved more than all of those, and Armstrong threw more punches than them all.

Fair enough, but Armstrong and Pep are my picks for number 2 and 3 all time P4P, both were freaks of nature, so it's going to be hard to find an exact match.

I agree, they were the best within the respective fields - Armstrong swarming, Pep boxing. Plus they were featherweights, naturally quicker and more agile, as well as active, than most - it's hard to find a replica match in heavier weight divisions.

I guess another possible example would be Jofre vs Harada

Possibly, although Jofre was past his prime there. Wasn't 'shot' by any means, but looked sluggish. Apparently he was struggling with weight - wouldn't be so bad if he was fighting a slickster, but Harada was a buzzsaw, the type of fighter who'd make you really pay if you wasn't in top shape.