Printable View
Willie Pep footwork video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9aEURJrgpw
Willie Pep tactics video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LZxF-4P1ng
Willie Pep smooth boxing skills video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huZC1RWe5KE
His style is a bit different to Floyd but it has the same effect in fights. I will always rate Willie better then PBF.
Enjoy :)
Skill-wise, Pep isn't even in Mayweather's league. Nor is he in Pernell's league. It pains me that when people think of defensive boxing, Pep gets brought up before these guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vendettos
Pep was a runner who couldn't fight effectively on the inside (like those two could) and when he ran up against big Sandy Saddler he had no ability to cope, to switch gears and deal with Saddler's power. He got beat up what, 3 or 4 times?
Had you watch the videos you would have seen a section dedicated to his in fighting and his up close tactics.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerSkill-wise, Pep isn't even in Mayweather's league. Nor is he in Pernell's league. It pains me that when people think of defensive boxing, Pep gets brought up before these guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vendettos
Pep was a runner who couldn't fight effectively on the inside (like those two could) and when he ran up against big Sandy Saddler he had no ability to cope, to switch gears and deal with Saddler's power. He got beat up what, 3 or 4 times?
Looks like he didn't want to fight inside, not that he couldn't. Had a killer jab too, when you can put 3 or 4 jabs together without an answer you are a wiz. He was jabbing to the body too, maybe Floyd is copying pep?Quote:
Originally Posted by VendettosHad you watch the videos you would have seen a section dedicated to his in fighting and his up close tactics.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerSkill-wise, Pep isn't even in Mayweather's league. Nor is he in Pernell's league. It pains me that when people think of defensive boxing, Pep gets brought up before these guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vendettos
Pep was a runner who couldn't fight effectively on the inside (like those two could) and when he ran up against big Sandy Saddler he had no ability to cope, to switch gears and deal with Saddler's power. He got beat up what, 3 or 4 times?
He wasn't comfortable inside and for all his supposed defensive wizardry he could never figure out how to stop Saddler from dropping bombs on his head.
Saddler was great and a monster but he wasn't some unbeatable enigma, I've seen him get dropped and out boxed.
Yes but for nearly 300 fights, you're bound to find one guy you'll struggle with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
I'm sure he was happy with that.
He had the perfect saying, run, counter, win.
I've always said Floyd fought similar to Pep, except Floyd doesn't use as much footwork.
I think you are correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by VendettosYes but for nearly 300 fights, you're bound to find one guy you'll struggle with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beanflicker
I'm sure he was happy with that.
He had the perfect saying, run, counter, win.
I've always said Floyd fought similar to Pep, except Floyd doesn't use as much footwork.
The Pep's my all time favorite boxer. I can't thank you enough for that :D
The art of moving out on angles while ducking then stopping dead and turning back under to catch them comming isnt finished just yet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSgXxyToirI#t=181
pep is better defensively than floyd for sure and is probably a bit better than pernell but that can be debated. floyd has greate defense but definitely isnt in the top 5 defensive fighters of all time like pep and pernell.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerSkill-wise, Pep isn't even in Mayweather's league. Nor is he in Pernell's league. It pains me that when people think of defensive boxing, Pep gets brought up before these guys.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vendettos
Pep was a runner who couldn't fight effectively on the inside (like those two could) and when he ran up against big Sandy Saddler he had no ability to cope, to switch gears and deal with Saddler's power. He got beat up what, 3 or 4 times?
you need to understand that pep fought saddler after his plane crash. he wasnt considered as good as he once was. also, as was previously mentioned, it was just a bad style match up. saddler was very tall and lengthy which could nullify peps outside fighting because saddler could hit him from the outside. pep was great at fighting at the perfect distance to be just out of range. saddler was just a bit too long. and realize that saddler is also an all time great so its not as if pep lost to a nobody. saddler won 3 out of 4 fights. in peps prime, im sure he wins at least one more and maybe two more.
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
How is Pep better than Floyd defensively? He could fight great on the outside. Floyd, Pernell, Locche, Bhop, Toney, ect could fight great on the outside and inside. And you know what? I don't remember ever seeing any of those guys get knocked out.
To be to fair to Pep he should not even boxed anymore after the plane crash he was really badly injured. Most people thought he was done. He did mange to beat Saddler in rematch who wasa man who held two division tiles at once and defended them as well so he was great him self.
I always wondered why Pep was rated higher than Saddler even though he had beaten him a few times. The aeroplane crash and injuries he suffered was one reason and the other was because he probably was his bogey man which some great fighters seem to have.
Let's not forget that Saddler wasn't the cleanest fighter there was. Whether the thumbs he put into the eyes of opponents was intentionality or not, the pace that he set had something to do with his opponents feeling uncomfortable at the urinals or unable to sit down and do the unmentionable without remembering they were OK before Sandy met them in that square. He just let his punches go and was very physical and many boxers lacking the big punch like Pep wished they had not cut classes in high school. Pep used his footwork to very end of his career even after the plane crash and you don't see Floyd using his all that much lately. He is still the man to beat and he draws the really large gates.
you also dont see those guys fighting as many fights as pep either. pep had 136 fights the first time he got KO'd and only his second loss. he wasnt fighting bums either. he was fighting experienced fighters and some HOFers. and as was just mentioned, saddler was a very dirty fighter. he also was a very hard hitter. and lastly, saddler was probably a better fighter than just about everybody any of those guys faced (there may be a few exceptions).Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerQuote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
How is Pep better than Floyd defensively? He could fight great on the outside. Floyd, Pernell, Locche, Bhop, Toney, ect could fight great on the outside and inside. And you know what? I don't remember ever seeing any of those guys get knocked out.
you have to realize that im sure that those fighters that you mentioned would have been KO'd at least once after 136 fights. his defense allowed him to win all of those other fights without getting KO'd.
He lost only 11 fights of 241.
Saddler was 3 of those.
He was stopped 6 times in his 241 fight career.
Saddler was 3 of those.
That actually makes Peps record seem better to me, because half his TKO losses and just under 25% of his total losses were by his bogey man.
Lets not forget they both had some dirty old school tricks. Saddler had a good chin and a good punch on top of a decent skill set. But the fact is he fought about 100 less fights than Pep and lost 5 times more.
Records are for DJs yes, but if Saddler had Peps number in the ring, I'm sure Pep was happy knowing he could figure out guys in 100 more fights than Saddler :)
Gotta look at quality too, though. Different eras. People go "goo goo" over big numbers in the win columns, but the VAST majority of the guys he fought were complete stiffs. We're talking guys with losing records, guys with under 15 fights, ect.
Just go through his record.
He beat Sandy Saddler for the FW title, and these were the records of his next 4 opponents:
10-13
39-27
45-20
29-13
He defends the FW title a few times, who does he fight?
14-11
68-22
30-26
28-16
28-23
Then he gets beat by Saddler.
16-19
8-18
52-14
51-14
17-5
29-2
9-23
Beats Corky Gonzales and loses again to Saddler
3-0
3-14
18-12
20-7
53-9 (who he's knocked out by)
50-30
27-12
ect ect
The guy fought a lot of bums. He fought some killers but he fought a ton of guys who didn't belong in the ring with him, too.
I'm sure Saddler was real jealous that Pep could figure out guys with near-losing records... :rolleyes:
some of his fights came against people who werent great but he would fight multiple of them in a months time. records can also be deceiving because unlike now, fighters were thrown to the wolves early in their careers and got a ton of losses because they fought experienced fighters way too early. and remember that floyd said his toughest fight was against augustus who had a record of 22-16-4 when they fought. so you can imagine that pep fought guys with records which werent visually pleasing but were still very good or at least very awkward fighters.
Bogey Flicker, you are starting to sound like a broken record. It's all very well to accuse people of lacking perspective and going "goo goo" over fighters from generations other than ours, but then you must apply the same strict criteria yourself.
It's seems you are on a mission to elevate FMJ above all others and dismiss any one else. There are plenty of people who rate Floyd and other modern fighters whilst being able to recognise talent from other eras. Pep is not a legend because everybody who rates him has lost all perspective, he is a legend because he earned it. Deal with it.
I'm the broken record? It's the same thing every time from you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenbeanz
1) Accuse me of being wrong/prejudiced/on a mission, yet offer no logic whatsoever as to why I am wrong/prejudiced/on a mission.
2) Set up straw man arguments by taking what I said out of context or put words in my mouth and argue those points.
At no point in this thread did I say Pep WAS NOT a legend, wasn't a great fighter, wasn't a great defensive fighter, ect. It's not all or nothing. When I say "I think Pep is overrated", that's not the same as saying "Willie Pep is pure shit and doesn't deserve ANY recognition". I think he was a fantastic fighter and a boxing legend, but his reflexes/speed/defensive ability, while clearly formidable, were not on the level of a Floyd Mayweather or Pernell Whitaker. That's all I'm saying.
I'm not as easily impressed with guys fighting multiple stiffs in a month. If you look at a top guy like Floyd, Pacquiao, ect, they're fighting EVERY DAY with their sparring. I know a legit fight is much different than sparring, but a lot of these guys that Pep fought could offer little but a mediocre sparring session for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
I'm not sure why guys get so much credit for fighting so much when the quality wasn't there. George Foreman beat fight bums in one night, and everyone ridiculed him and called it a fiasco and a joke. Do people think Floyd or Pacquiao couldn't fight 4 or 5 bums a month and build up a record like that?
again, i will mention augustus. supposedly floyds toughest fight. an awkward, tough fighter that gave floyd fits. do you not think that there were many of those types of fighters around back in the day? i believe that floyd would have a few losses on his record if he fought as often as old fighters because you just run into problem matchups and bad days. pac is the same way. i think that he could definitely run into fighters that would give him major problems if he fought that frequently.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerI'm not as easily impressed with guys fighting multiple stiffs in a month. If you look at a top guy like Floyd, Pacquiao, ect, they're fighting EVERY DAY with their sparring. I know a legit fight is much different than sparring, but a lot of these guys that Pep fought could offer little but a mediocre sparring session for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
I'm not sure why guys get so much credit for fighting so much when the quality wasn't there. George Foreman beat fight bums in one night, and everyone ridiculed him and called it a fiasco and a joke. Do people think Floyd or Pacquiao couldn't fight 4 or 5 bums a month and build up a record like that?
i just dont think that most of peps fights were against bums. he probably had a few that were against fighters that just werent very good, but i would guess that most of his fights were against solid opponents that gave effort which is tiring after a while.
I think you're reading way too much into Augustus, who Floyd fought injured and took lightly, but I do agree that some of those guys who had shitty records were probably a lot tougher than their record gave them credit for. I'm sure he ran into the odd Freddie Pendleton or Emmanuel Augustus.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
But herein lies the double standard: people will praise Pep for quantity and fighting so many people and different styles with no mention of quality. We are willing to give Pep the benefit of the doubt: we assume that he fought a lot of tough guys, even if their records would indicate that they were bums or club fighters at best. Then when we talk about Floyd Mayweather or another modern great, we'll go through his record with a fine toothed comb and accuse him of not fighting anybody.
Floyd has fought nothing but champions and top 10 opposition since 1998, which included just about every style and body type you can think of. Why aren't we willing to give Floyd and his opposition the benefit of the doubt?
Why is a club fighter from the 1940s better than a club fighter from 2014?
i agree with you. i am an advocate to floyd. i understand that he has fought the best fighters over the years. im not at all saying that he hasnt. my main argument is that from all of the pep fights ive seen and all of the floyd fights ive seen, pep is a better defensive fighter.
Ok but help me see what you see. I'm totally open to changing my opinion on this. What does Pep do better than Floyd or Pernell? Did he have better head movement? Foot movement? Did he keep better range? Was he a better ring general? Did he fight more effectively on the inside? Was he able to switch from offense to defense quicker and more effectively? Did he counter off a defensive move to greater effect?Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
I'd love to know why he's better. I'd love for someone to point me to a few particular fights and say "look at this, Floyd or Pernell would never be able to do what he just did there".
Don't get me wrong, I know Pep was fast as a mother fucker, had great movement and reflexes.
To me, he was one of the great outside fighters of all time. He was an escapist. He'd move and move so the guy would have trouble getting set, he'd jump in with his attack and jump back out, he'd retreat when he got charged, and he'd tie guys up if he felt uncomfortable. Great, world class stuff.
My point is that guys like Pernell, Floyd, and Locche did that (Locche wasn't as fast of foot as these guys but I'll include him anyway), but they were also much more adept at working defensively on the inside. Not that Pep was a slouch on the inside, he could duck punches and tie guys up, but that's not where he was comfortable and I've never seen him stand in the pocket or against the ropes and be effective. The big problem he had with Saddler is that he couldn't consistently keep the stronger Saddler off of him and was forced to fight on the inside and against the ropes more often than usual, and he was almost entirely uneffective in both working his offense and nullifying Saddler's defense.
Look at Floyd: even when he's pushed up against the ropes (ala Maidana), when do you really see him get hit with anything substantial? Guys like Floyd and Pernell had another dimension to their game where they were comfortable wherever the fight took place, and therefore I find it a little short sighted that Pep would get the defensive nod over either of them.
pep is better defensively than floyd with his head movement, upper body movement, distance, and quick feet. pep and sweet pea have similar defensive styles and floyd and locche have similar defensive styles. floyd is better in the pocket at defense. thats more where he thrives on defense. he has solid outside defense but his pocket defense is where he gets his credit. he isnt as good as locche though because that guy could avoid any and all punches somehow.
floyd actually has trouble when he gets to the ropes. if you watch the fighters over the years that have pushed him to the ropes (castillo, sosa, cotto, and maidana all come to mind), it makes floyd uncomfortable and he gets hit cleanly. he wants to be in the middle of the ring where he can spin out of a bad situation if he gets in trouble. pep also has this same problem which is what saddler exploited. mayweather just never fought a saddler type fighter (paul williams has the same body type so it could have been an alright comparison had they fought).
i feel like they have separate types of defenses but that pep is altogether better.
I don't think it's fair to say Floyd is uncomfortable and gets hit clean on the ropes. Maidana had him there for 12 rounds and never landed anything of real substance that hurt Floyd. We're talking about a guy who's never been dropped and we can count the number of times he's been hit with a punch that hurt him on one hand.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
I don't know if I agree about Floyd never fighting a Saddler-type fighter. What about Diego Corrales? Corrales was a tall power puncher (33-0 with 27 KOs at the time). Willie Pep was 5'5'' and Saddler was 5'8'' - a 3 inch advantage. Floyd was 5'8'' and Diego was 5'11'' - again, a 3 inch advantage. I think Corrales was very comparable to Saddler in terms of size, style, power, and the height advantage held over Floyd as opposed to the height advantage Saddler had on Pep.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpKHFZ6ixKs
Look at that. Pep is fast but gets absolutely mauled by body shots and dropped in the corner in the first round. Pep is the classic slickster, he's great at avoiding those bad areas but when he got in them he had no idea what to do.
You contrast that with what Floyd did to Corrales, and I think anyone should be able to see the difference. Corrales got Floyd up against the ropes and corner and landed nothing clean.
Lol anyway,
Pep beat Chalky Wright, Sal Bartolo, Phil Terranova, Willie Roach, Jackie Wilson, Jock Leslie, Eddie Compo, Charley Riley, Ray Famechon, Spider Armstrong, Joey Peralta, and world champions Sandy Saddler, Manuel Ortiz and Paddy DeMarco. w/l records don't tell the whole story. Not sure what part of that fact confuses people? Some guys fought once a week. If they fought once a year they may have an 0 some some of today's tomato cans.
But speaking of win/loss Peps peak record was 135-1-1. The only guy close to that is Robinson at 128-1-2.
Glad Willie fought when he did. If he was fighting today, he wouldn't get a fight.
Nobody is confused. If you have a losing record, you don't belong in the ring with a world champion. If you have under 15 fights, you don't belong in there with a world champ that has over 100. That's as true now as it was in 1930.Quote:
Originally Posted by IamInuit
It's the same issue I've brought up time and time again without answer: the double standard between judging old timers and modern fighters. When it's old timers, we give a 80/20 split in focus/importance to quantity. When it's modern fighters, we give the 80/20 split in focus/importance to quality. Well, which one is it? Is it impressive to fight more often against lesser opposition or less often against greater opposition? I've been asking this for years and nobody has given me an answer. It also exposes and underlying problem in boxing fans: very few people actually watch fights and form original opinions any more. It betrays lazy thinking and often no thinking at all. Why is Willie Pep the greatest? Oh, because I read he was. All this stuff just becomes accepted as part of boxing law and nobody questions it.
It's thinly-veiled lemming syndrome. You ask someone to justify their opinion and they can't do it. They'll do like Greenz and say "OH WELL ITS MY OPINION IT CAN'T BE WRONG." Weak thinking mother fuckers ;D
By that logic Rigo should have never been in there with anyone he has fought as a pro along with all the other boxers that got title shots in quick fashion. Fighters have actually debuted in title fights. In addition again, if you fight once a week or once a month you are going to have a losing record. When you fight once a year you might bring a winning record. What makes Pep a phenom is that he did both. I remember you jumped all over Greb because he fought 45 times in one year and never lost.Quote:
If you have a losing record, you don't belong in the ring with a world champion. If you have under 15 fights, you don't belong in there with a world champ that has over 100. That's as true now as it was in 1930.
Lets pull 45 guys off the street and have Floyd fight them in one year and see what happens.
Look in the mirror though. Anytime any past great is brought up, the first thing you attempt to do is ridicule and belittle them. We are comparing different eras that are and were different how else are we to compare? I'm sure military men compare battlefields of the past with today's and in some cases copy the past like the Yanks copying Rommel in the Iraqi desert. You discount past greats because there is no video well when Ray Robinson says Pep was the best pure boxer he'd ever seen I have a tendency to believe him.Quote:
When it's old timers, we give a 80/20 split in focus/importance to quantity. When it's modern fighters, we give the 80/20 split in focus/importance to quality.
Btw I think Sanchez rips Peps head off and Arguello would also but that does not take away from the mans greatness.
Corrales wasn't the same type of fighter as saddler. It's not just about being tall but about being aggressive and even dirty. Just like Floyd mentioned maidana using dirty tactics in their fight. That is why Floyd had trouble. Saddler would have been way worse. Also, Floyd did get hit cleanly by maidana multiple times. He took the punches well though.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanflickerI don't think it's fair to say Floyd is uncomfortable and gets hit clean on the ropes. Maidana had him there for 12 rounds and never landed anything of real substance that hurt Floyd. We're talking about a guy who's never been dropped and we can count the number of times he's been hit with a punch that hurt him on one hand.Quote:
Originally Posted by powerpuncher
I don't know if I agree about Floyd never fighting a Saddler-type fighter. What about Diego Corrales? Corrales was a tall power puncher (33-0 with 27 KOs at the time). Willie Pep was 5'5'' and Saddler was 5'8'' - a 3 inch advantage. Floyd was 5'8'' and Diego was 5'11'' - again, a 3 inch advantage. I think Corrales was very comparable to Saddler in terms of size, style, power, and the height advantage held over Floyd as opposed to the height advantage Saddler had on Pep.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IpKHFZ6ixKs
Look at that. Pep is fast but gets absolutely mauled by body shots and dropped in the corner in the first round. Pep is the classic slickster, he's great at avoiding those bad areas but when he got in them he had no idea what to do.
You contrast that with what Floyd did to Corrales, and I think anyone should be able to see the difference. Corrales got Floyd up against the ropes and corner and landed nothing clean.