BoxRec

How come this guy NEVER had a chance to fight the Danny Lopez, the Salvador Sanchez, the Azumah Nelsons and the Wilfredo Gomez of the world?

How can a guy that had around 13 title defenses in 4 years was not even a consideration for the Sanchez camp to unify the titles?

How can the Gomez and Nelsons wanted Sanchez INSTEAD of a title bout with Pedroza?

If Sanchez was so great, why he did not challenged Pedroza instead of Lopez?

this guy Pedroza was DUCKED in my view...Is he, like Charley Burley, Aaron Pryor and Mantequilla Napoles, one of the most DUCKED fighters ever?

elmersalsa wrote:How come this guy NEVER had a chance to fight the Danny Lopez, the Salvador Sanchez, the Azumah Nelsons and the Wilfredo Gomez of the world?

How can a guy that had around 13 title defenses in 4 years was not even a consideration for the Sanchez camp to unify the titles?

How can the Gomez and Nelsons wanted Sanchez INSTEAD of a title bout with Pedroza?

If Sanchez was so great, why he did not challenged Pedroza instead of Lopez?

this guy Pedroza was DUCKED in my view...Is he, like Charley Burley, Aaron Pryor and Mantequilla Napoles, one of the most DUCKED fighters ever?

He was quite happy doing his WBA thing.

PS, did you have a little drink tonight?

Because he was a naughty boy in there.

bennie wrote:Because he was a naughty boy in there.

There gotta be SOMETHING MORE THAN THAT for this fighter to be IGNORED. He was a COMPLETE FIGHTER, AND A VERY CONFIDENT ONE.

He challenged all those four guys, at least 3 of them: Sanchez, Nelson and Gomez and they put their faces somewhere else.

elmer, you are making assumptions that probably aren't true.

First of all. Just because a guy says he wants to fight someone, doesn't mean that he really has any intention of actually doing so. It's easy to say in public " I will want to fight so and so" or "I will fight anyone", but that doesn't mean anything.

For all we know, Pedroza ducked the other guys.

Secondly, even if a fighter wants to fight another fighter, it doesn't automatically mean that the other fighter ducked him just because the fight doesn't take place.
The timing is important. They both have to be available at the same time.
Not only that, sometimes boxing politics prevent certain fights from happening.

Thirdly, in the case of Sanchez, he died at the age of 23. There is a good chance that he would have fought Pedroza had he not been killed.

Btw-As for other fighters that were ducked, Aaron Pryor shouldn't be considered someone who was. If anything, it seems that he was the one that didn't want to take the risks. While Jr Welterweight champion, he did give title shots against some of the top Jr Welterweights. It's hard to believe they would duck him rather than get a title shot.
If he really wanted to fight the top Welterweights, he could have moved up in weight, beat a couple of welterweight contenders and he would have gotten a title shot. They shouldn't be accused of ducking someone that isn't even in their weight class.

elmersalsa wrote:How come this guy NEVER had a chance to fight the Danny Lopez, the Salvador Sanchez, the Azumah Nelsons and the Wilfredo Gomez of the world?

How can a guy that had around 13 title defenses in 4 years was not even a consideration for the Sanchez camp to unify the titles?

How can the Gomez and Nelsons wanted Sanchez INSTEAD of a title bout with Pedroza?

If Sanchez was so great, why he did not challenged Pedroza instead of Lopez?

this guy Pedroza was DUCKED in my view...Is he, like Charley Burley, Aaron Pryor and Mantequilla Napoles, one of the most DUCKED fighters ever?

Thanks for that.

Very interesting.

While Pedroza was greatly respected as a true road warrior, Sanchez was generaly seen as the King at featherweight, mainly for his two wins over Danny Lopez: both shown on American TV, so hence that's where the money was.
And that's why Gomez picked him when moving up.

The unknown Nelson was picked as a showcase fight for Sanchez, and by the time he was back on track, Pedroza was lined up for McGuigen.

A unification fight between Pedroza and Sanchez was talked about for awhile, but it was going to be financed by Harold Smith, who was using other people's money. He talked about it being part of a mega bill, involving unification fights in around nine divisions, plus Cooney/Norton I think.
It was pie in the sky though, and Harold was in the slammer shortly after.

Anyone seen a young Pedroza take on Alfonso Zamora? He was pole axed and out before he hit the ground - shows you what a frightening puncher the Z boy was.

Alp, I see your view...But how the timing was right, when Sanchez had lots of title defenses in between the Lopez, Gomez and Nelsons fights?

I saw Pedroza PUBLICLY called Nelson on ESPN in one of his title defenses...I think it was against Jorge Lujan in Panama.

Pedroza in the EARLY 80s, WAS ALREADY AN ESTABLISHED CHAMPION with 13 title defenses by 1981. How come this guy was IGNORED?

Then to top it off, he also called Salvador Sanchez and Wilfredo Gomez numerous times. I think he did not had the BACKING of a great promoter like Sanchez had with Don King. How can Don King missed Pedroza?

I have read that Salvador's mind was already on fighting Alexis.But if this was the case, I think it's real sad, since Eusebio might have taken him by decision.

As for timing in regard to Sanchez, Pedroza would sign to fight one guy while Sanchez was training for another fight. After Sanchez's fight, he would sign for a fight while Pedroza would be training for his fight and so on. This kind of thing happens. Eventually they probably would have fought had Sanchez not been killed. He was only 23.

Sanchez's fight with Nelson really wasn't really seen as a big fight at the time. No one knew that he was that good. It wouldn't have been seen as a big fight for Pedroza either if he had taken on Nelson at that time.

Gomez would have been a big fight for Pedroza. However, Gomez-Sanchez was seen as even bigger and so that fight was made.

After Gomez lost to Sanchez, he wasn't considered that great of a threat at featherweight. Had Gomez fought Pedroza soon after getting whipped by Sanchez, it wouldn't have been that big of fight. Gomez' stock had fallen after the loss to Sanchez.

Had Gomez had beaten Sanchez, then a Pedroza-Gomez fight may have happened.

I don't think that Gomez,Sanchez, Nelson ducked Pedroza. Pedroza was really just unlucky that he didn't have a "Super Fight" with any of them.
He was also considered a rather boring fighter compared to guys like Gomez or Sanchez. He wasn't that big of a drawing card with the public. I'm guessing that is another reason that King didn't make this happen. Unfortunately, boxing is a business and the most deserving fighters don't always get the big money fights.

Were Sanchez and Pedroza scheduled to meet on the infamous MAPS bill that never was?

Elmer has a tendency to get excited when he thinks he smells an injustice... especially when it isn't there.

You can't blame Gomez for fighting Sanchez instead of Pedroza, Sanchez was the bigger name and the more respected fighter, as others have already pointed out. And if Sanchez had fought Arguello instead of Pedroza, which was apparently his intention, then he would have been taking the better opponent.

I Feel Fine wrote:Elmer has a tendency to get excited when he thinks he smells an injustice... especially when it isn't there.

You can't blame Gomez for fighting Sanchez instead of Pedroza, Sanchez was the bigger name and the more respected fighter, as others have already pointed out. And if Sanchez had fought Arguello instead of Pedroza, which was apparently his intention, then he would have been taking the better opponent.

ifeelfine has a tendency to circulate around boxrec making ad hominem attacks.

Elmer should be commended for calling attention to an overlooked fighter in Pedroza.

granberry wrote:

I Feel Fine wrote:Elmer has a tendency to get excited when he thinks he smells an injustice... especially when it isn't there.

You can't blame Gomez for fighting Sanchez instead of Pedroza, Sanchez was the bigger name and the more respected fighter, as others have already pointed out. And if Sanchez had fought Arguello instead of Pedroza, which was apparently his intention, then he would have been taking the better opponent.

ifeelfine has a tendency to circulate around boxrec making ad hominem attacks.

Elmer should be commended for calling attention to an overlooked fighter in Pedroza.

Don't we mean "apparently" overlooked? Elmer's asking the fair question...perhaps getting off your butt and doing some RESEARCH on this subject might produce a credible answer to this good question granberry. Rather than making the declaration.

However it may be a lot easier just to assume the worst and DECLARE Pedroza as an overlooked fighter. He may well be. But it aint neccessarily so.

My first question might go along these lines....I havent' looked at the timelines recently but it is reasonable to assume that Sanchez might have gotten around to him? Do we know what sort of communications were going on between the two camps if any? Could it have been just the reverse?

I can tell you that there are compelling answers to the contrary for at least one of the names on elmers list. I'm not sure about Pedroza.

BoxBuzz wrote:

granberry wrote:

I Feel Fine wrote:Elmer has a tendency to get excited when he thinks he smells an injustice... especially when it isn't there.

You can't blame Gomez for fighting Sanchez instead of Pedroza, Sanchez was the bigger name and the more respected fighter, as others have already pointed out. And if Sanchez had fought Arguello instead of Pedroza, which was apparently his intention, then he would have been taking the better opponent.

ifeelfine has a tendency to circulate around boxrec making ad hominem attacks.

Elmer should be commended for calling attention to an overlooked fighter in Pedroza.

Don't we mean "apparently" overlooked? Elmer's asking the fair question...perhaps getting off your butt and doing some RESEARCH on this subject might produce a credible answer to this good question granberry. Rather than making the declaration.

However it may be a lot easier just to assume the worst and DECLARE Pedroza as an overlooked fighter. He may well be. But it aint neccessarily so.

My first question might go along these lines....I havent' looked at the timelines recently but it is reasonable to assume that Sanchez might have gotten around to him? Do we know what sort of communications were going on between the two camps if any? Could it have been just the reverse?

I can tell you that there are compelling answers to the contrary for at least one of the names on elmers list. I'm not sure about Pedroza.

buzz has a reading comprehension problem.

Or does he just travel around boxrec like ifeelfine and her buddies, eager to snip at certain others in ad hominem attacks?

Bicker bicker bicker like a group of old women.

That what boxrec amounts to in the eyes of buzz, ifeelfine, collins, p4, irene and the rest of their sorry crew.

granberry wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:

granberry wrote: ifeelfine has a tendency to circulate around boxrec making ad hominem attacks.

Elmer should be commended for calling attention to an overlooked fighter in Pedroza.

Don't we mean "apparently" overlooked? Elmer's asking the fair question...perhaps getting off your butt and doing some RESEARCH on this subject might produce a credible answer to this good question granberry. Rather than making the declaration.

However it may be a lot easier just to assume the worst and DECLARE Pedroza as an overlooked fighter. He may well be. But it aint neccessarily so.

My first question might go along these lines....I havent' looked at the timelines recently but it is reasonable to assume that Sanchez might have gotten around to him? Do we know what sort of communications were going on between the two camps if any? Could it have been just the reverse?

I can tell you that there are compelling answers to the contrary for at least one of the names on elmers list. I'm not sure about Pedroza.

buzz has a reading comprehension problem.

Or does he just travel around boxrec like ifeelfine and her buddies, eager to snip at certain others in ad hominem attacks?

Bicker bicker bicker like a group of old women.

That what boxrec amounts to in the eyes of buzz, ifeelfine, collins, p4, irene and the rest of their sorry crew.

granny if I gotcha wrong I'm sorry bout that. I actually thought you were affirming the worst assumption......I wonder what in the world made me jump to that conclusion?
Please forgive

I Feel Fine wrote:Elmer has a tendency to get excited when he thinks he smells an injustice... especially when it isn't there.

You can't blame Gomez for fighting Sanchez instead of Pedroza, Sanchez was the bigger name and the more respected fighter, as others have already pointed out. And if Sanchez had fought Arguello instead of Pedroza, which was apparently his intention, then he would have been taking the better opponent.

How can Arguello be the better fighter when Arguello was past his prime?
How can you jump to 2 weight classes, or INTEND to jump to 2 weight classes, when the other champ is calling your name all the time for a title unification?

That SMELLS like DUCKING to me. Pedroza was an excellent SKILLED FIGHTER and great RING TECHNICIAN. He knew every little trick in the book. He was hard to hit cleanly, always in great shape, tall, great jab, unbelievable concentration and poise on the road, fast, had a decent punch and could hurt you to the body with the bolo punch he used frequently. He could also fight good inside and outside...He was A COMPLETE FIGHTER just like Sanchez and Gomez.

When Gomez won the feather title, he did not go against Pedroza but with Juan LaPorte, one of Pedroza's victims. Then while champion, HE DID NOT MADE AN ATTEMPT for a title unification.

Then, Nelson, fights Gomez and also TOTALLY IGNORES the WBA King Pedroza. Pedroza even called him out to fight him.

That Gomez, Nelson or Sanchez were "better" than Pedroza, I DO NOT BUY THAT. YOU GOT TO PROVE IT IN THE DAMN RING.

This guy, Pedroza, might be "boring" or was an excuse for the media or promoters like Don King and Bob Arum not to give him a shot against their super star fighters.

We don't know what would have happened, but on the day that Sanchez died Arguello was a three division champion and was coming off a win over Ray Mancini... he may not have been at his peak, but that's easy for us to say in hindsight, he was still very good and could have beaten Sanchez. The notion that Sanchez is "ducking" Pedroza because he wants to jump up two weight classes to fight Arguello is, I think, a good example of non-thinking. If Mayweather, instead of fighting Cotto, did something crazy and moved up two weight classes to fight Pavlik for a lot more money; would you accuse Mayweather of ducking?

That, of course, assumes that Sanchez would have fought Arguello. We really don't know what he would have done; which goes to what alp was saying, that for all we know Sanchez could have fought Pedroza if he had lived longer. Who the hell knows.

I also reject the idea that no one wanted to fight Pedroza. Maybe some fighters might or might not have avoided him, but Zamora fought him, Olivares fought him, Lockridge fought him, La Porte fought him, McGuigan fought him. Not really a terrible list, is it? He didn't get to fight in a unification match, but there were a lot of potential unifications that could have been made during or near that era in multiple weight classes that never happened; its an unfortunate fact in boxing that unifications are rare. As for Gomez, he was champion for less than a year, that may or may not have played into there not being a unification match; I really don't know. But what I do know is that it is revisionist history to suggest that Gomez did something strange by fighting Sanchez instead of Pedroza; I think anyone remotely familiar with that time knows that Sanchez was better known and more respected. Sanchez-Gomez was a big fight for the lower weight classes.

Unless you can find a source that has Sanchez or someone close to Sanchez saying that he did not want Pedroza because he thought it too much of a risk, then you're just making idle speculation and are simply trying to tarnish Sanchez, who was clearly not afraid to take on the best.

I Feel Fine wrote:We don't know what would have happened, but on the day that Sanchez died Arguello was a three division champion and was coming off a win over Ray Mancini... he may not have been at his peak, but that's easy for us to say in hindsight, he was still very good and could have beaten Sanchez. The notion that Sanchez is "ducking" Pedroza because he wants to jump up two weight classes to fight Arguello is, I think, a good example of non-thinking. If Mayweather, instead of fighting Cotto, did something crazy and moved up two weight classes to fight Pavlik for a lot more money; would you accuse Mayweather of ducking?

That, of course, assumes that Sanchez would have fought Arguello. We really don't know what he would have done; which goes to what alp was saying, that for all we know Sanchez could have fought Pedroza if he had lived longer. Who the hell knows.

I also reject the idea that no one wanted to fight Pedroza. Maybe some fighters might or might not have avoided him, but Zamora fought him, Olivares fought him, Lockridge fought him, La Porte fought him, McGuigan fought him. Not really a terrible list, is it? He didn't get to fight in a unification match, but there were a lot of potential unifications that could have been made during or near that era in multiple weight classes that never happened; its an unfortunate fact in boxing that unifications are rare. As for Gomez, he was champion for less than a year, that may or may not have played into there not being a unification match; I really don't know. But what I do know is that it is revisionist history to suggest that Gomez did something strange by fighting Sanchez instead of Pedroza; I think anyone remotely familiar with that time knows that Sanchez was better known and more respected. Sanchez-Gomez was a big fight for the lower weight classes.

Unless you can find a source that has Sanchez or someone close to Sanchez saying that he did not want Pedroza because he thought it too much of a risk, then you're just making idle speculation and are simply trying to tarnish Sanchez, who was clearly not afraid to take on the best.

The evidences are clear. We might think that Sanchez was more "respected", but CLEARLY Gomez nor Sanchez wanted no part of this guy. He was technically skilled, in his prime, was magnificent counter puncher, could fight well inside as well as the outside, and come from one of the best schools of boxing at the time: Panama.

None of them made the attempt to UNIFY the titles...I think if Pedroza was more of an ordinary or just average fighter, the unifications would have been done a long time ago by the Sanchez' camp. This was a guy that wanted to fight the best...He did not had the OPPORTUNITY.

BUT LIKE YOU SAY: WHY RISK YOUR REPUTATION AGAINST SOMEONE DANNGEROUS LIKE PEDROZA FOR SMALL CHANGE THAN TO FIGHT GOMEZ FOR MUCH MUCH MUCH MORE MONEY.

I could see why the Leonards, Durans and Hearns did not wanted no part of Mike McCallum. He was not a FACTOR, they were looking for the biggest fights and they wanted to fight Hagler. But McCallum was not an established champion like when Pedroza was at 126 pounds. He already had 13 title defenses by 1981, MOSTLY ON THE ROAD, and was a clever and dangerous opponent for Sanchez to look upon...I THINK THAT THAT WAS THE WHOLE TRUTH. THAT IS THE WAY I SEE IT.

elmersalsa wrote:

I Feel Fine wrote:We don't know what would have happened, but on the day that Sanchez died Arguello was a three division champion and was coming off a win over Ray Mancini... he may not have been at his peak, but that's easy for us to say in hindsight, he was still very good and could have beaten Sanchez. The notion that Sanchez is "ducking" Pedroza because he wants to jump up two weight classes to fight Arguello is, I think, a good example of non-thinking. If Mayweather, instead of fighting Cotto, did something crazy and moved up two weight classes to fight Pavlik for a lot more money; would you accuse Mayweather of ducking?

That, of course, assumes that Sanchez would have fought Arguello. We really don't know what he would have done; which goes to what alp was saying, that for all we know Sanchez could have fought Pedroza if he had lived longer. Who the hell knows.

I also reject the idea that no one wanted to fight Pedroza. Maybe some fighters might or might not have avoided him, but Zamora fought him, Olivares fought him, Lockridge fought him, La Porte fought him, McGuigan fought him. Not really a terrible list, is it? He didn't get to fight in a unification match, but there were a lot of potential unifications that could have been made during or near that era in multiple weight classes that never happened; its an unfortunate fact in boxing that unifications are rare. As for Gomez, he was champion for less than a year, that may or may not have played into there not being a unification match; I really don't know. But what I do know is that it is revisionist history to suggest that Gomez did something strange by fighting Sanchez instead of Pedroza; I think anyone remotely familiar with that time knows that Sanchez was better known and more respected. Sanchez-Gomez was a big fight for the lower weight classes.

Unless you can find a source that has Sanchez or someone close to Sanchez saying that he did not want Pedroza because he thought it too much of a risk, then you're just making idle speculation and are simply trying to tarnish Sanchez, who was clearly not afraid to take on the best.

The evidences are clear. We might think that Sanchez was more "respected", but CLEARLY Gomez nor Sanchez wanted no part of this guy. He was technically skilled, in his prime, was magnificent counter puncher, could fight well inside as well as the outside, and come from one of the best schools of boxing at the time: Panama.

None of them made the attempt to UNIFY the titles...I think if Pedroza was more of an ordinary or just average fighter, the unifications would have been done a long time ago by the Sanchez' camp. This was a guy that wanted to fight the best...He did not had the OPPORTUNITY.

BUT LIKE YOU SAY: WHY RISK YOUR REPUTATION AGAINST SOMEONE DANNGEROUS LIKE PEDROZA FOR SMALL CHANGE THAN TO FIGHT GOMEZ FOR MUCH MUCH MUCH MORE MONEY.

I could see why the Leonards, Durans and Hearns did not wanted no part of Mike McCallum. He was not a FACTOR, they were looking for the biggest fights and they wanted to fight Hagler. But McCallum was not an established champion like when Pedroza was at 126 pounds. He already had 13 title defenses by 1981, MOSTLY ON THE ROAD, and was a clever and dangerous opponent for Sanchez to look upon...I THINK THAT THAT WAS THE WHOLE TRUTH. THAT IS THE WAY I SEE IT.

Can you post some clear evidence of where and when Pedroza's backers made serious offers to Sanchez and were knocked back?

If it's as clear cut as you are trying to make out, it shouldn't be too hard for you to furnish some evidence.

Caps aren't helping.

Its not just that McCallum wasn't as established as Hagler, there was also a lot more money in fighting Hagler. And Hagler was the more accomplished fighter, so fighting Hagler meant more. Same deal with Arguello; if Sanchez had fought him, it would have been because there was more money in it, but also because Arguello was the more accomplished fighter and he would have been the better opponent.

Evidence would be needed if someone wanted to suggest that Sanchez was somehow "afraid" of Pedroza.

elmersalsa wrote:
The evidences are clear. We might think that Sanchez was more "respected", but CLEARLY Gomez nor Sanchez wanted no part of this guy. He was technically skilled, in his prime, was magnificent counter puncher, could fight well inside as well as the outside, and come from one of the best schools of boxing at the time: Panama.

None of them made the attempt to UNIFY the titles...I think if Pedroza was more of an ordinary or just average fighter, the unifications would have been done a long time ago by the Sanchez' camp. This was a guy that wanted to fight the best...He did not had the OPPORTUNITY.

BUT LIKE YOU SAY: WHY RISK YOUR REPUTATION AGAINST SOMEONE DANNGEROUS LIKE PEDROZA FOR SMALL CHANGE THAN TO FIGHT GOMEZ FOR MUCH MUCH MUCH MORE MONEY.

I could see why the Leonards, Durans and Hearns did not wanted no part of Mike McCallum. He was not a FACTOR, they were looking for the biggest fights and they wanted to fight Hagler. But McCallum was not an established champion like when Pedroza was at 126 pounds. He already had 13 title defenses by 1981, MOSTLY ON THE ROAD, and was a clever and dangerous opponent for Sanchez to look upon...I THINK THAT THAT WAS THE WHOLE TRUTH. THAT IS THE WAY I SEE IT.

Excellent points.

Pedroza was a rough guy.
.

granberry wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:
The evidences are clear. We might think that Sanchez was more "respected", but CLEARLY Gomez nor Sanchez wanted no part of this guy. He was technically skilled, in his prime, was magnificent counter puncher, could fight well inside as well as the outside, and come from one of the best schools of boxing at the time: Panama.

None of them made the attempt to UNIFY the titles...I think if Pedroza was more of an ordinary or just average fighter, the unifications would have been done a long time ago by the Sanchez' camp. This was a guy that wanted to fight the best...He did not had the OPPORTUNITY.

BUT LIKE YOU SAY: WHY RISK YOUR REPUTATION AGAINST SOMEONE DANNGEROUS LIKE PEDROZA FOR SMALL CHANGE THAN TO FIGHT GOMEZ FOR MUCH MUCH MUCH MORE MONEY.

I could see why the Leonards, Durans and Hearns did not wanted no part of Mike McCallum. He was not a FACTOR, they were looking for the biggest fights and they wanted to fight Hagler. But McCallum was not an established champion like when Pedroza was at 126 pounds. He already had 13 title defenses by 1981, MOSTLY ON THE ROAD, and was a clever and dangerous opponent for Sanchez to look upon...I THINK THAT THAT WAS THE WHOLE TRUTH. THAT IS THE WAY I SEE IT.

Excellent points.

Pedroza was a rough guy.
.

No one said he wasn't a rough guy.

By the way, I saw you had another crack at getting some love in "the greatest thread ever". The lads are still ignoring your boring ass, I notice.

Collins2000 wrote:

granberry wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:
The evidences are clear. We might think that Sanchez was more "respected", but CLEARLY Gomez nor Sanchez wanted no part of this guy. He was technically skilled, in his prime, was magnificent counter puncher, could fight well inside as well as the outside, and come from one of the best schools of boxing at the time: Panama.

None of them made the attempt to UNIFY the titles...I think if Pedroza was more of an ordinary or just average fighter, the unifications would have been done a long time ago by the Sanchez' camp. This was a guy that wanted to fight the best...He did not had the OPPORTUNITY.

BUT LIKE YOU SAY: WHY RISK YOUR REPUTATION AGAINST SOMEONE DANNGEROUS LIKE PEDROZA FOR SMALL CHANGE THAN TO FIGHT GOMEZ FOR MUCH MUCH MUCH MORE MONEY.

I could see why the Leonards, Durans and Hearns did not wanted no part of Mike McCallum. He was not a FACTOR, they were looking for the biggest fights and they wanted to fight Hagler. But McCallum was not an established champion like when Pedroza was at 126 pounds. He already had 13 title defenses by 1981, MOSTLY ON THE ROAD, and was a clever and dangerous opponent for Sanchez to look upon...I THINK THAT THAT WAS THE WHOLE TRUTH. THAT IS THE WAY I SEE IT.

Excellent points.

Pedroza was a rough guy.
.

No one said he wasn't a rough guy.

By the way, I saw you had another crack at getting some love in "the greatest thread ever". The lads are still ignoring your boring ass, I notice.

Sicko collins, the poisonous snake of boxrec, slithers around in his agony as he demonstrates his sicko, feminine fixatations.

Elmer has brought up a number of excellent points about a fighter he is interested in, while collins the snake feels free to trash elmer's thread with his own fixated sickness.

Ambling Alp wrote:elmer, you are making assumptions that probably aren't true.

First of all. Just because a guy says he wants to fight someone, doesn't mean that he really has any intention of actually doing so. It's easy to say in public " I will want to fight so and so" or "I will fight anyone", but that doesn't mean anything.

For all we know, Pedroza ducked the other guys.

Secondly, even if a fighter wants to fight another fighter, it doesn't automatically mean that the other fighter ducked him just because the fight doesn't take place.
The timing is important. They both have to be available at the same time.
Not only that, sometimes boxing politics prevent certain fights from happening.

Thirdly, in the case of Sanchez, he died at the age of 23. There is a good chance that he would have fought Pedroza had he not been killed.

Btw-As for other fighters that were ducked, Aaron Pryor shouldn't be considered someone who was. If anything, it seems that he was the one that didn't want to take the risks. While Jr Welterweight champion, he did give title shots against some of the top Jr Welterweights. It's hard to believe they would duck him rather than get a title shot.
If he really wanted to fight the top Welterweights, he could have moved up in weight, beat a couple of welterweight contenders and he would have gotten a title shot. They shouldn't be accused of ducking someone that isn't even in their weight class.

That's right, don't go believing everything you hear. Now if the fighter goes up to you at a press conference and says fight me and the other guy tells you 'sit down this is my show', that's what I would call ducking the other fella.

Alp I know you're not going to respond to this but didn't leonard skip the routine of earning a middleweight title shot with Hagler? And since that's the case, this same rule should be skipped if Pryor wants to head straight towards him and kick his ass.

Must be nice to make up your own rules right Alp?