Was Willie Pep a COWARD?

[kayjay]

"My fight style is 'he who hits and runs away lives to fight another day'. So that's what I did for 29 years. I tried to hit and run. And I got away with it."
- Willie Pep

I doubt you really want my opinion of Pep. You want to see if the Floyd haters are hypocritical. I'll just say that's not the style of fighting I enjoy watching. My favorites from history are Joe Frazier and Roberto Duran. I liked Chavez more than Whitaker. I like Oscar, but he pissed me off a few times. I respect Floyd, but I don't like seeing him win. I wish he had a Frazier or Duran who had the talent to get in his chest and dominate him. hatton is likely not that guy.

But a coward? Who the **** am I to call a championship boxer a coward?

[MickyHatton]

Pep was far from a coward, he was just a masterful boxer.

Anyone who climbs into a boxing ring should never be called a coward let alone someone who has had 240+ Pro fights.

So no.

[sonofisis]

Anyone who climbs into a boxing ring should never be called a coward

Excellent point, which I think sums up the thread basically..

[wmute]

Out of those 240 fights you have a handfull of guys worth a dam ,, the modern sportsman will whip the guys from way back every day of the week , times have changed , training has changed , athletes have changed dramaticly since the 70s and all for the better , in every field of human or animal competition the modern athlete is better more skilled better trained and better fed , the record books of all sport prove it .

Like the fights that went 30 rnds or more , the modern guys are gassed in 12 , whats going on ,, they must have been supermen in those days , wouldnt have anything to do with they threw 5 punches a round and stood there like coat hangers , same as having a 1000 fights its only relative to who you fight, when you are fighting the very best level of comp you cant go to the well every month , 240 fights divided by say 20 yrs is 1 fight a month over the entire 20 yrs , yeah right what was the competition like you say ,, the best gauge is to open your eyes and watch the old fights ,, Floyd would belt Pep no problems and Ali would school Dempsey ,

Out of 240 fights you would find 80 guys on a high level? that's still twice as much as 40.

Floyd would "belt" Pep no problems because Pep was a featherweght throughout his prime in the days of same day weigh ins, hence a much smaller man.

Frazier beat Ali once and always gave him hell, so I dont see how Dempsey would be schooled by Ali. You probably have some secret inside information, or you just dont get it..

The rest of your post misses the very simple point that fighting is fighting and training is training, you cite other sports, which do not require a fraction of the guts and the brains that boxing does.
Today's fighter run faster? Yesterday's fighters cut the ring a million times.
Today' fighter hit harder? Yesterday's fighters had better defense (even someone like Jake La Motta, who was getting hit a lot, was constantly rolling with punches and not only he was not hurt, he was not even cut).

Also, since you like statistics... Boxing until the 60s had a huge talent pool, much bigger than today's. What do you make of that? Chances are the best out of 1000 is going to be better than the best out of 100, no?

Finally, you dont seem to understand that an all timer trasported to today and fighting a 12 rounder would lose, just as much as an athlete from today taken back to the 20s would lose his no scheduled round fights.

And let me point out that I dont think that all the great oldtimers are better than all the current fighters. I also dont think that the modern crop is la créme of the history of the sport.

[Phantasm]

Also, to say Pep "was arguably a top 20 all time" sounds like a compliment but, man, to say he was anything lower than number 5 or 6 is an INSULT. Sugar Ray Robinson said Pep was pound for pound the BEST ever

Ice, I said he's arguably a top 10 and definately a top 20. I based that comment on most observer's views (these are the so called experts who have seen them come and go).

Imo, he's in the top 10 all time. I've tried to get as many fights of his as possible to watch him and to someday show my kids one of the TRUE legends of the sport. I would never insult him, or any fighter, who would step into the ring, EVER.

[ßringer]

Mayweather is nowhere near Pep in terms of sheer competition and number of fights, anybody who would argue that is a moron. Mayweather is near Pep in terms of sheer talent and raw natural ability, anybody who would argue against that is also a moron.

Listen guys, you'll never find a modern era fighter or even a fighter in recent memory ('80 and forward) who can compare to a fighters like Robinson, Pep and Sadler. Times were different back then, there were no big pay days, no 6 months off between fights, you had to fight constantly if you wanted to make ends meet during the depression. It was a different era, one the likes of which we'll never see again.

No modern fighter will ever match or surpass fighters like the ones I mentioned because the eras don't match up. That's not to say modern era fighters aren't every bit as good as a guy like Pep or Robinson, because Mayweather is every damn bit as good as Pep ever was. It's just impossible to match them in terms of a record because the Great Depression impacted their record greatly, if they didn't fight constantly they would never survive.

[Sweet Pea 50]

Damn, Bringer, you pretty much wrapped up the issue for me. GREAT POST! Back in Pep's era, they had to have that many fights. It's how they put food on the table. It was their JOB. The elite fighters today are getting 100 times the amount of money from one fight then the elites of Pep's probably made in their whole CAREERS. So the pressure to fight 10 times a year to just to make a living is just not relevent in todays era.
Calling Floyd, "Fake Floyd", he runs all the time, a coward, is just ignorant. Hey Floyd haters, how bout this. Put in the thousands of hours of training, do the thousands of miles of road work. Lace up the gloves, and fight elite fighters. Oh whats that? You haven't even BOXED before? And you call Mayweather a coward? You guys are just amazing...

[tredh]

Mayweather is nowhere near Pep in terms of sheer competition and number of fights, anybody who would argue that is a moron. Mayweather is near Pep in terms of sheer talent and raw natural ability, anybody who would argue against that is also a moron.

Listen guys, you'll never find a modern era fighter or even a fighter in recent memory ('80 and forward) who can compare to a fighters like Robinson, Pep and Sadler. Times were different back then, there were no big pay days, no 6 months off between fights, you had to fight constantly if you wanted to make ends meet during the depression. It was a different era, one the likes of which we'll never see again.

No modern fighter will ever match or surpass fighters like the ones I mentioned because the eras don't match up. That's not to say modern era fighters aren't every bit as good as a guy like Pep or Robinson, because Mayweather is every damn bit as good as Pep ever was. It's just impossible to match them in terms of a record because the Great Depression impacted their record greatly, if they didn't fight constantly they would never survive.

Great post

[ßringer]

Great post

Just tyring to keep everybody in check. Without the Great Depression guys like Pep, Robinson and Sadler wouldn't have had the amazing careers they had. It was a do or die situation. Some boxers talk about fighting to survive, very few actually have had to do it the way those guys did.

As I said, it's not improbable that Mayweather's skills aren't equal to or better than Pep's. It's just the record and era that places Pep above him. The same way Marvin Hagler's skills were comparable to Sugar Ray Robinson's, ultimately no matter how great your skills are you'll never surpass those select fighters who fought in that era. History and survival demanded it, unlike today.

[Mike Tyson77]

Hell No, Pep aint no coward.