Willie Pep considered greater than Sandy Saddler...

[brownpimp88]

If being past his prime effected him so much, how did Tyson beat guys like Ruddock and Bruno? Did the division suck that much?

tyson was a ranked fighter up until the lennox lewis fight. Were u not alive back in 2002, everyone was saying if rahman can beat lewis, tyson would smoke him.

Do you really think that the outcome of saddler vs pep would have been different if it happened 3 years earlier. Saddler is the best opponent he ever fought and he came up short.

[Kid Achilles]

The point I made zipped over your head. Well over your head. Pep won the title after his prime because he remained an exceptional fighter, a pound for pound great. Even after he'd lost some of his athletic ability from the crash and his injuries, he was an insanely skillful boxer. Tyson likewise (though not to the same degree) was still head and shoulders over his competition in ability so even though he lost his skills, he was too much for many of the top fighters of his time.

Do you actually think I believe Tyson was in his prime for the losses I listed? No, I was making fun of you.

My point is this, and I make it a lot: you don't know jack **** about boxing history. You question those who assert that Dempsey lost to Tunney because he was over the hill, Liston to Ali, Chavez to Whitaker, etc. etc. when in fact to most rational people this is as plain as night and day.

Most great boxers suffer their worst and most embarrassing losses when they're past their best days and in unfavorable circumstances. From Achilles falling to the limp wristed Paris (due to Apollo's will) to Sullivan succumbing to his alcoholism and losing to Corbett right on to a shot Tyson taking a beating at the hands of Lewis, it's a fate that has befallen warriors since the history of time, in life and in literature. You call it an excuse because you're bitter and like to start troubler and get attention for yourself but the rest of us realize it's a historic trend.

You probably do as well, but like I said, you enjoy pissing people off. You're a part time troll.

[brownpimp88]

You would never go up to saddler's grave and tell him his wins over pep are meaningless. i dare ya!

Pep got in a plane crash at the beginning of 1947. So if his career from 1947-1959 is useless and means nothing, he is nowhere near the top 10 p4p of all times. His accomplishments from 1942-1946 are not that much, 75% of his big wins came after the plane crash nuff said, baby achilles. You must be an italian.

[brownpimp88]

The point I made zipped over your head. Well over your head. Pep won the title after his prime because he remained an exceptional fighter, a pound for pound great. Even after he'd lost some of his athletic ability from the crash and his injuries, he was an insanely skillful boxer. Tyson likewise (though not to the same degree) was still head and shoulders over his competition in ability so even though he lost his skills, he was too much for many of the top fighters of his time.

Do you actually think I believe Tyson was in his prime for the losses I listed? No, I was making fun of you.

My point is this, and I make it a lot: you don't know jack **** about boxing history. You question those who assert that Dempsey lost to Tunney because he was over the hill, Liston to Ali, Chavez to Whitaker, etc. etc. when in fact to most rational people this is as plain as night and day.

Most great boxers suffer their worst and most embarrassing losses when they're past their best days and in unfavorable circumstances. From Achilles falling to the limp wristed Paris (due to Apollo's will) to Sullivan succumbing to his alcoholism and losing to Corbett right on to a shot Tyson taking a beating at the hands of Lewis, it's a fate that has befallen warriors since the history of time, in life and in literature. You call it an excuse because you're bitter and like to start troubler and get attention for yourself but the rest of us realize it's a historic trend.

You probably do as well, but like I said, you enjoy pissing people off. You're a part time troll.

dude sir jose told me everything about you, ur a clueless idiot. There is a reason you always run away when he comes here to post.

jack dempsey ****in sucks ass, he wouldnt even beat vitali klitchko.

Let me guess kid, billy conn is better than michael spinks, right moron.

excuse me if i dont care about the 1870's or 1910's, lol. Who the **** actually gives a **** about an era where guys were on top cuz coloured people were blacklisted.

[LondonRingRules]

Pep got in a plane crash at the beginning of 1947. So if his career from 1947-1959 is useless and means nothing, he is nowhere near the top 10 p4p of all times. His accomplishments from 1942-1946 are not that much, 75% of his big wins came after the plane crash

** Pep was 108-1-1 and feather champ before the crash. That's HOF worthy if his career stopped, which almost happened since he was paralyzed with a broken back.

75% of you seems to be mush with fuzzy edges. The premise of the post was ridiculous to begin with. Pep is a great no matter how much anyone likes Saddler and viceversa.

[bill1234]

...., why? Considering Saddler knocked him out twice. Is it just a case of styles making fights? Did Saddler just have Pep's number, or is there more to it. I see Pep's name on a lot of all time p4p lists, but Saddler never shows up.

Well 1, Pep was past it. 2. It is stylers. and 3. look how dirty Saddler was fighting.

[QueensburyRules]

...., why? Considering Saddler knocked him out twice. Is it just a case of styles making fights? Did Saddler just have Pep's number, or is there more to it. I see Pep's name on a lot of all time p4p lists, but Saddler never shows up.

- -It's ye olde saw, "If U gotta ask, U too toopid to understand."