View Full Version : would it be illogical to have willie pep P4P #1


boxingking500
04-17-2011, 07:43 PM
pep is one of the most skilled, greatest boxers of all time.... his defensive skills were amazing.... he had great speed..

i was just wondering.. do you think someone could make a case and have Pep above SRR?

Steak
04-17-2011, 08:37 PM
I dont think so. Pep was a marvel, but I went over both of their careers in depth recently and Robinson just beat better opposition overall, not to mention he did it over multiple weight classes.

I think you can make a better case for Archie Moore being rated over Robinson, but I think most people(likely me included) would disagree with that.

also you could throw the names Langford and Greb out there, but seeing as there is little footage of them as well as not quite as much documentation on the quality of their opposition, its kind of hard to make a solid irrefutable case.

RubenSonny
04-17-2011, 08:42 PM
http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=473023

Wild Blue Yonda
04-18-2011, 02:34 AM
I have Pep at the tail-end of the top-10, all-time. Spectacular fighter, but I just feel he is not quite arguable as the best ever.

JAB5239
04-18-2011, 04:09 AM
I have Pep at the tail-end of the top-10, all-time. Spectacular fighter, but I just feel he is not quite arguable as the best ever.

Agreed. To many fighters with much better resumes.

SBleeder
04-18-2011, 07:18 AM
Not completely illogical, but I don't have him that high. In fact, Pep isn't even my #1 featherweight of all time (that honor goes to Henry Armstrong in my opinion).

The_Demon
04-18-2011, 07:46 AM
Yes it would be illogical,he was an incredible fighter but i simply couldnt rank him ahead of SRR or Moore for that matter

IronDanHamza
04-18-2011, 10:00 AM
Willie Pep was a great fighter, I would have him in my Top 10 of all time.

But, I don't see how he could be ranked #1.

So yes, It would be illogical, IMO.

Barn
04-18-2011, 11:54 AM
I have Pep at 8 I think.

I just don't see it personally...at all.

It would need a helluva explanation and odd criteria.

Barn
04-18-2011, 12:18 PM
i cannot think of many with better resumes
Robinson, Langford, Greb and Charles are all definites for me do you disagree with any of these?

Barn
04-18-2011, 12:29 PM
you think their resumes are "BETTER" than Pep's ?
Yes, you obviously don't haha.

JAB5239
04-18-2011, 12:34 PM
i cannot think of many with better resumes

To be ranked #1 all time? Lol, I can think of 5 or 6 at least.

JAB5239
04-18-2011, 12:36 PM
you think their resumes are "BETTER" than Pep's ?

With out a doubt.

JAB5239
04-18-2011, 01:14 PM
can't have Langfords resume as better than Willie Pep's

Undoubtedly its better. Gans (arguably the greatest lightweight ever), Blackburn, Johnson (who would later avoid him like the plague), Ketchel, Philadelphia Jack O'Brien, McVea, Jeanette, Norfolk, Flowers and a host of other ranked contenders including the best black fighters of his day.

JAB5239
04-18-2011, 01:49 PM
maybe in your eyes it is but certainly not in mine

Feel free to make an argument on Pep's behalf than, I'd welcome the challenge.

JAB5239
04-18-2011, 01:59 PM
Willie Pep's resume includes included world champions

Sandy Sadler
Sammy Agnott
Sal Bartolo
Willie Joyce
Manuel Ortiz
Phil Terranova
Paddy DeMarco
Harold Dade
Chalky Wright
Hogan Kid Bassey

Top Contenders
Ray Famechon
Jock Leslie
Jackie Lemus
Eddie Campo
Joey Archibald
Bob McIntyre
Jackie Wilson
Lulu Perez

Willie Pep was also severly injured in a plane crash in 1947 when in the prime of his career with many saying,"he was never the same fighter after" otherwise his career achievements may well have been even greater.

With the exception of Saddler, none of those top names listed are in the same class as the fighters on Langfords resume. Of the ones I named all but McVea are top 20 all time fighters in one division or another and I mistakenly left out Harry Wills.

Pep's injuries in that plane crash have no bearing on what their respective resumes are historically just like Langford being ducked by any top fighters has no bearing. They are what they are and those are the only merits you can argue in this debate.

NChristo
04-18-2011, 02:09 PM
With the exception of Saddler, none of those top names listed are in the same class as the fighters on Langfords resume. Of the ones I named all but McVea are top 20 all time fighters in one division or another and I mistakenly left out Harry Wills.

Pep's injuries in that plane crash have no bearing on what their respective resumes are historically just like Langford being ducked by any top fighters has no bearing. They are what they are and those are the only merits you can argue in this debate.

I agree with Langford over Pep but no love for Manuel Ortiz ?, top 10 Bantam and he was just as talented as if not more so then Ketchel and Jeanette(Lack of footage of the others, cannot judge) at least imo.

Joeyzagz
04-18-2011, 02:17 PM
-Harry Greb
-Bob Fitzsimmons
-Henry Armstrong

All have a stronger case than Pep. I have Willie at #5 or #6.

JAB5239
04-18-2011, 02:35 PM
I agree with Langford over Pep but no love for Manuel Ortiz ?, top 10 Bantam and he was just as talented as if not more so then Ketchel and Jeanette(Lack of footage of the others, cannot judge) at least imo.

Touche', very nice catch.

JAB5239
04-18-2011, 03:00 PM
you got any links or proof of where i can see those guys listed as Top 20 ATG fighters in their divisions... so what you are saying is that those world champions who Pep beat was not worthy fighters?... have you seen any of their fights?

http://boxing.about.com/od/history/a/50_greatest.htm

Nope.I got no links to prove many of them are top 20. But of you would like to post your top 20's without them I'd be happy to carve them apart and show you where they belong. That really isn't necessary though since you link and the ones I've provided prove Langford fought the superior competition as I had already stated.

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/ibro_25.html

http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/callis-rankings.htm

IBROíS 25 Greatest Fighters of All Time

16.11.06 - By Monte Cox: For generations of sporting men baseball and boxing were the two most popular sports in the world. It was not until the post WW 2 era that other sports started to gain in popularity. Not until the 1960ís did boxing begin to take a backseat to sports such as football and later basketball. In the Oct. 9, 2006 issue of Sports Illustrated a panel of 22 experts submitted their list for the All Time All Star baseball team. The SI listing is a whoís who of the greatest names in the history of baseball. In like manner, the IBRO (International Boxing Research Organization) published a listing of the greatest boxers of all time in IBRO Journal # 91 Sept, 27 2006.

The IBRO is an esteemed group of analysts who are well researched in the history of boxing. The IBRO membership had 30 historians participating in the poll. Votes were on a points based system.

Voters submitted a list of 20 boxers with one point for a 20th place vote and 20 points for a first place vote. This lineup of boxing greats is as definitive as it gets. The point of the poll was to achieve a community sentiment as to who were the greatest fighters of all time. Having 9 of the top 10, 14 of the top 15, and 21 of the top 25 finishers when comparing to my own personal ratings one can see that the ratings were fairly uniform with the consensus of experts concurring to a large degree. Here is a roll call of the 25 greatest fighters of all time.

1. Sugar Ray Robinson

2. Harry Greb


3. Henry Armstrong


4. Muhammad Ali

5. Joe Louis


6. Sam Langford



7. Roberto Duran



8. Benny Leonard


9. Willie Pep


10. Bob Fitzsimmons



11. Joe Gans


12. Ezzard Charles

13. Ray Leonard

14. Jimmy Wil

15. Eder Jofre


16. Mickey Walker



17. Archie Moore


18. Jack Dempsey



19. Jack Johnson



20. Gene Tunney

21. Stanley Ketchel


22. Joe Walcott


23. Rocky Marciano


24. Tony Canzoneri



25. Barney Ross


<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/1h7OXlPeMQI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Barn
04-18-2011, 03:21 PM
No love for ol' Ezzard. I have him at 5.

JAB5239
04-18-2011, 03:29 PM
resume.. we are talking resume here or have you forgotten

I think its you who has forgotten. Look at these lists and show me all the names Pep beat in comparison to who Langford beat. As usual your BS is put to shame by the facts.

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/1h7OXlPeMQI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

JAB5239
04-18-2011, 03:46 PM
we are talking resume here and wether you like it or not this is a statistical fact - Pep achieved the greatest peak won-loss record in history 134-1-1... Robinson, Langford, Grebb or Charles all fall short with their resumes when it comes against the above statistical fact.

Pep is a boxing immortal. His 134-1-1 record is great. But its fluff compared to who each man actually fought and beat in their careers and that is how resumes are judged first and foremost. There is no way around this for you because Langford simply beat better fighters during his career. You're always asking for links, well I've given them to you and in every one Langford rates higher and his competition rates higher. since they never fought h2h head these rankings are based on their respective resumes. You're shooting blanks Sonny, just give it up.

JAB5239
04-18-2011, 04:17 PM
you made a comment saying there are "Too many boxers with better resumes than Pep"... i replied "i cant think of many" based on his 134-1-1..

Once again, resume is based on WHO you beat more than anything else. Do you disagree with this? If so we might as well put Joe Mesi and Sven Ottke up there with Marciano because they went undefeated in their careers.

you then twist it around to insinuate that Langfords win-loss record is better even tho it is a statistical fact in boxing history that Pep holds the greatest peak win-loss record of all times of any boxer in the sports history, yet when that evidence is put infront of you you say just give it up your shooting blanks Sonny

Once again when you're losing a debate you blatantly make up lies. Par for the course.

If Pep has the better resume than why has Langford have more names on his ranked on every list? Can you provide a link showing Pep fought better fighters? Are you going to post your top 20 lists so we can debate where the fighters I mention earlier belong? You won't do any of these things because you can't, and that is a FACT!

BigStereotype
04-19-2011, 01:13 AM
i already posted up a list of the World champions who Willie Pep fought and you referred to them as "FLUFF" and you done that because you know absolutely nothing whatsoever about any of those champions who Pep fought, you have never seen any of them fight on film nor have you any idea of how good they was so you brush them off as FLUFF... why don't we just add Willie Pep to the Boxingscene History section garbage bin along with a long list of other ATGs like Tyson, Dempsey, Tunney, Marciano, Johnson & Joe Louis and talk about your own personal list of who you think are the real greats of the sport ie: Langford, Greb, Tommy Morrison, David Tua & Lennox Lewis.

You really are baffling sometimes, bro.

JAB5239
04-19-2011, 01:14 AM
i already posted up a list of the World champions who Willie Pep fought and you referred to them as "FLUFF" and you done that because you know absolutely nothing whatsoever about any of those champions who Pep fought, you have never seen any of them fight on film nor have you any idea of how good they was so you brush them off as FLUFF... why don't we just add Willie Pep to the Boxingscene History section garbage bin along with a long list of other ATGs like Tyson, Dempsey, Tunney, Marciano, Johnson & Joe Louis and talk about your own personal list of who you think are the real greats of the sport ie: Langford, Greb, Tommy Morrison, David Tua & Lennox Lewis.

More lying by poor sonny when he knows he can't hang with the facts and refuses to answer questions. Tsk, tsk, tsk!

I've never referred to the champions Pep fought as "fluff". You trying to blow his "peak" record up instead of comparing the actual fighters each fought is the fluff. You have once again been exposed as a liar and out of your league when trying to debate me on anything. shall we post a poll asking who had the better resume and ask what the fine posters in this section think?

Still waiting on you to answer those question. :dunno:

JAB5239
04-19-2011, 01:16 AM
You really are baffling sometimes, bro.

He's the most immature 50 year old in the world. He hates being proven wrong and throws a tantrum every time it happens.

BigStereotype
04-19-2011, 01:19 AM
He's the most immature 50 year old in the world. He hates being proven wrong and throws a tantrum every time it happens.

...he's 50? Really?

JAB5239
04-19-2011, 01:25 AM
...he's 50? Really?

So he claims. Who knows for sure, he's a notorious liar who has been caught and exposed time and again.

Vadrigar.
04-19-2011, 02:06 AM
No way. Robinson, Ali, Armstrong, Langford and Louis rank higher. His resume isn't as strong as the others.

JAB5239
04-19-2011, 02:07 AM
you will have to show me where it is that i have "LIED" and where it is that i have refused to answer questions?..

"Once again, resume is based on WHO you beat more than anything else. Do you disagree with this?"


"If Pep has the better resume than why has Langford have more names on his ranked on every list? Can you provide a link showing Pep fought better fighters? Are you going to post your top 20 lists so we can debate where the fighters I mention earlier belong?"

Do these questions look familiar? All still unanswered.

i laughed at the last part of your reply when once again you suggest shall we post a poll"... you are once again looking for back-up because you know i have caught you out again.

I don't need back up, I know how the poll will turn out because the posters in this section are open minded and can see the facts for themselves.

so let me for the final time point out to you a Boxing statistical fact. "Willie Pep holds the record for the greatest peak win-loss record of 134-1-1"... yet you dismiss that fact and claim there are "Too many with better resumes"....

Your little fact while impressive is what is immaterial, unless of course you judge a resume by the amount of wins instead of the level of fighters actually beaten. In this department Pep simply is not up there with Langford and I've provided you precious links to prove this.

your suggestion of a poll is completely imaterial because i posted a subject 4 days ago to test out what kind of knowledge the posters in this section have of the great fighters in history, that subject is "Who wins between Emile Griffith v Floyd Mayweather @147lbs" and just as i expected that subject received not a single response in 3 days,

Real classy putting down the posters of this section when you're the one who routinely gets taken to school on here. Your narcissism is hysterical!

you yourself actually moved the thread for some unknown reason yet you never made a comment on that thread, with the reason being that you know nothing whatsoever about Emile Griffith or his style of fighting so did not want to commit yourself and have me shoot you down in flames.

What is it, is it an unknown reason or a reason being? Get it together already. The reason it was moved is because it belonged in the fantasy fight section. But you're right, Im not well versed with Griffith and Im not ashamed to admit it. Unlike you I don't try to speak authoritatively about things I don't know.But I have spoken with Mr. Griffith several times on facebook and will be making an effort to understand his career more closely when Im down with the crop of fighters I've been focused on the past several months.

. like all your cronies on this forum who are only young kids who was still in junior school at the turn of the century.. yet your asking to make a poll and have them decide if Willie Pep boxing statistical resume stands up against Sam Langfords..

Age doesn't dictate knowledge, only wisdom. You're sorely lacking in both.

That is the way you operate JAB, as soon as you feel the heat you turn for help from your young friends who do not have a clue who Willie Pep or Emile Griffith are or was and only know who Langford was because you have told them about him on this forum.

Wow, you certainly have your finger on the pulse of this board. If we're such a sorry crop of posters why do you keep coming back? You did after all say you would never post here again, yet here you are. Just another lie of the many, right?

JAB5239
04-19-2011, 03:07 AM
Langford lost to most of the fighters you listed and lost many times to them so if it is based on "WHO YOU BEAT" like you claim it is then Pep wins by a landslide, also many of Langfords wins are debatable newspaper decisions.. Pep beat the very best opposition there was to beat and was world champion for 6yrs going 134-1-1...

Who beat more top 50 fighters ranked p4p all time? Who beat more IBHOF inductees? Who is recognized as the greater fighter by the IBRO? You love list yet don't want to comment on the ones I've provided. Hmm.

What Top 20 list do you want me to make?

I said these fighters with the exception of McVea and Jeanette were all top 20 fighters all time in their respective divisions. Gans, walcott, Blackburn, Johnson (who would later avoid him like the plague), Ketchel, Philadelphia Jack O'Brien, McVea, Jeanette, Norfolk and Flowers. You asked for a link and I challenged you to provide top 20 list where these guys WOULDN'T be included. You won't do it because you know Im right. If not...go for it!

i disagree with you claiming others on here are openminded... some are and some are very knowledgable but many are in their teens and know virtually nothing about the sport.

Yep, now you know the ages of the many posters here. :lol1:

you aint proved or provided nothing.. Pep beat many men who was World Champion (more than Langford) but you are dismissing those World champions as nobodies.

You have a serious problem with lying, did you know that? Provide a link where I ever dismissed any of those guys as "nobodies". I've simply said and will reiterate the Langford beat better fighters in his career.

IMO i have never ever been taken to school on this forum in the 7yrs i have been a member yet the number of times i have taken you to school over the last 6 months alone is greater than what you claim my age to be.

Lol, this just goes to show how big your ego and air of self importance is. Pathetic!

i disagree with you in that Age does dictate how much knowledge one can have of this particular sport.. id a guy has followed the sport religiously for say 40yrs compared to another guy who has done the same for only 8yrs then that guy with the 40yrs of knowledge will have the most to offer in debate on a greater variety of fighters.. an example i have collected a vast library of fight-films over the last 40yrs and if i was to give them to my young nephew (19yr old) to view, it would take him to he was 35yrs old to view them all and that watching 24hrs per day.

None of this means anything when your closed minded and think you know it all. I'll take an open minded person wanting to learn over a closed minded wanna be know of all any day of the week.

The reason i decided to post again on this forum was to keep you in check.. to correct your many mistakes you make each day and to let the younger members know the correct historical facts of the great fighters who fought before they was born, because you simply are not telling it like it really was JAB .. your slacking my friend so i need to be here to help you out and make sure the facts get printed.... i also enjoy all the red K you send me each time i help you out as it lets me know that you appreciate my imput.

No, the reason you started posting again is because you have a familiarity here and didn't want to go through the ridicule and embarrassment of having your moronic views laughed at being the "new guy". Either way, its just another lie you told. Its a pattern with you.

JAB5239
04-19-2011, 04:11 AM
JAB.. Let me answer these questions for you in honesty... i provided a list for you before you even provided a list so let me once again post up that link for you which you over-looked and you will see they have Pep at No5 and Langford No10 yet this is not about ranking or who would beat who its about resume and 134-1-1 is the greatest in boxing history wether you like it or not... you seem to think i do not rate Sam Langford for some reason and again you could not be further from the truth.



http://boxing.about.com/od/history/a/50_greatest.htm

You're still ducking my questions and still have not made any lists. And when did ESPN become experts in boxing when they in fact have very little coverage of it in comparison to other sports? Who was part of the poll, was it fans? And with all that Langford has still fought 3 fighters in the top 50 in comparison to Peps 1.

i don't lie and never have lied.

Really? Look below for just one example of your lies.

there is also no self-importance here only from yourself who on a daily basis acknowledges ALL members personal opinions with the exception of "SONNYBOY" yes thats correct everyone can express their opinion on the forum except SONNYBOY... and if SONNYBOY expresses his opinion you delete that opinion is this correct JAB?

This right here is a lie. Show me one opinion of yours I've deleted in this thread. The only thing you're barred from talking about is LL because of you obsessive hatred and trolling. Get use to it because it will never change. Do you realize since I came back yesterday I had to delete nearly half your post because they were LL hate related with other poster making comments to you like "not this again".

i do not think i know it all but i am 100% certain that i know a vast amount more about this sport that what you know or that you will ever know.

I wish that were true because Im willing to learn from anyone with an objective open mind. Unfortunately you do not fall under that category.

The real reason i came back to post on this forum was because i was e.mailed and asked by some members to return to the forum because it was "not the same without me posting" The forum was dying a death with very little traffic since i quit so would i come back and post. i deliberated over it for a couple of days and decided i would give it another go last weekend, within 2 days the traffic on the site started to pick-up and i received e.mails saying welcome back Sonny we have missed your imput. i even received Green K saying so, as well as my usual red K from Mr Pedigree along with yourself JAB calling me a liar... you then with your moderator powers decided to delete from me that Green K and leave me in the red but the members decided against you and turned me back to green within the hour... JAB you are not a guy who likes to discuss boxing, you are a guy who only likes to hear his own voice otherwise you would not keep deleting my posts and it's not as if others don't notice what you are doing, they do... so remember this buddy "i am here to help you keep the traffic flowing" but here mostly to talk boxing with my e.mail friends and others who i admire as real boxing men.

Ahh I get it...you want me out as moderator, so you're going to help me keep the board going! Thats a brilliant plan! :rofl:

You need not reply to this post Sonny. Anything not concerning the the thread title will be deleted. If you feel the need to keep talking of other things than that you should go to the comments and suggestions section.

Spartacus Sully
04-19-2011, 04:30 AM
"Willie Pep holds the record for the greatest peak win-loss record of 134-1-1"

Thats a ****ing amazing record....but during that time pep fought from feather weight to light weight and fought people who were featherweight to light weight.....not exactly what i would call a P4P achievement.

perhaps greatest of all time at 123-135 but #1 P4P, I wouldnt say so.

JAB5239
04-19-2011, 04:35 AM
Thats a ****ing amazing record....but during that time pep fought from feather weight to light weight and fought people who were featherweight to light weight.....not exactly what i would call a P4P achievement.

perhaps greatest of all time at 123-135 but #1 P4P, I wouldnt say so.

He's the greatest featherweight all time in my opinion. But that isn't p4p.

Barn
04-19-2011, 10:51 AM
Saying newspaper decisions for Langford were "debatable" is insane.

I can never recall reading of a fight where Langford benefited from any one of these decisions.

If it wasn't for crappy decisions Langford would have been Welterweight champion.

IronDanHamza
04-19-2011, 11:24 AM
you will have to show me where it is that i have "LIED" and where it is that i have refused to answer questions?.. i laughed at the last part of your reply when once again you suggest shall we post a poll"... you are once again looking for back-up because you know i have caught you out again. so let me for the final time point out to you a Boxing statistical fact. "Willie Pep holds the record for the greatest peak win-loss record of 134-1-1"... yet you dismiss that fact and claim there are "Too many with better resumes".... your suggestion of a poll is completely imaterial because i posted a subject 4 days ago to test out what kind of knowledge the posters in this section have of the great fighters in history, that subject is "Who wins between Emile Griffith v Floyd Mayweather @147lbs" and just as i expected that subject received not a single response in 3 days, you yourself actually moved the thread for some unknown reason yet you never made a comment on that thread, with the reason being that you know nothing whatsoever about Emile Griffith or his style of fighting so did not want to commit yourself and have me shoot you down in flames.. like all your cronies on this forum who are only young kids who was still in junior school at the turn of the century.. yet your asking to make a poll and have them decide if Willie Pep boxing statistical resume stands up against Sam Langfords.. That is the way you operate JAB, as soon as you feel the heat you turn for help from your young friends who do not have a clue who Willie Pep or Emile Griffith are or was and only know who Langford was because you have told them about him on this forum.

I respect you Sonny, I do. It's abundantly clear you have a vast knowledge of this sport.

But what are you basing your comments off? How do you know how old people in this section are? As far as I'm aware I only know the ages of a handful of people in this section who have there age on display like yourself, Poet, Jab, WBY, TBear etc who are coinsidently all above the age of 40.

I presumed the majority of this section is atleast 30. Maybe I'm wrong but I mean you can't just presume like that, surely? The only person I can think of in this section that's a young kid is RubenSonny and he has an excellent knowledge of the sport for such a young kid.

Barn
04-19-2011, 11:35 AM
I respect you Sonny, I do. It's abundantly clear you have a vast knowledge of this sport.

But what are you basing your comments off? How do you know how old people in this section are? As far as I'm aware I only know the ages of a handful of people in this section who have there age on display like yourself, Poet, Jab, WBY, TBear etc who are coinsidently all above the age of 40.

I presumed the majority of this section is atleast 30. Maybe I'm wrong but I mean you can't just presume like that, surely? The only person I can think of in this section that's a young kid is RubenSonny and he has an excellent knowledge of the sport for such a young kid.
The internet is deceiving.

GJC
04-22-2011, 10:32 AM
Not totally illogical, Pep is one of a few fighters that you have to respect enough to give him consideration. For my money though no, top 10, but with guys like SRR, Greb and Langford I can't put him at no.1