Who is the greatest ever Featherweight?

[Galaxy]

Overall its Pep for me... but from those I've seen a lot of then its Sanchez!

Based on what I've seen, what I've read/ researched my top 5 would be:

Pep
Armstrong
Sandler
Miller
Kid Chocolate

[CutMeMick]

I'll start of by saying that Henry, Kid Chocolate, Alexis, Erik, MAB and Pac all did better at different divisions there for I rate them in those divisions, accordingly.

As usual on my lists you will not see any names of fighters I've not seen with my own eyes. You will see fighters I've seen a handful of fights on and know well...

With that in mind here's how I see it.

1. "Chava" Sanchez
2. JMM
3. Azumah
4. Saldivar
5. Pedroza
6. "Springfield Rifle" Moore
7. "Sugar" Ramos
8. Naz
9. "Little Red" Lopez
10. J. Famechon

Honors: "Ñato" Marcel, Winstone, Luisito, "Mantecas" Medina, Baby Arizmendi & Jorge Paez.

[eagle]

I'll start of by saying that Henry, Kid Chocolate, Alexis, Erik, MAB and Pac all did better at different divisions there for I rate them in those divisions, accordingly.

As usual on my lists you will not see any names of fighters I've not seen with my own eyes. You will see fighters I've seen a handful of fights on and know well...

With that in mind here's how I see it.

1. "Chava" Sanchez
2. JMM
3. Azumah
4. Saldivar
5. Pedroza
6. "Springfield Rifle" Moore
7. "Sugar" Ramos
8. Naz
9. "Little Red" Lopez
10. J. Famechon

Honors: "Ñato" Marcel, Winstone, Luisito, "Mantecas" Medina, Baby Arizmendi & Jorge Paez.

Come on Johnny Famechon!

[Manuel "Chubby" Medina]

Sanchez
Marquez
Morales

[Galaxy]

I'll start of by saying that Henry, Kid Chocolate, Alexis, Erik, MAB and Pac all did better at different divisions there for I rate them in those divisions, accordingly.

As usual on my lists you will not see any names of fighters I've not seen with my own eyes. You will see fighters I've seen a handful of fights on and know well...

With that in mind here's how I see it.

1. "Chava" Sanchez
2. JMM
3. Azumah
4. Saldivar
5. Pedroza
6. "Springfield Rifle" Moore
7. "Sugar" Ramos
8. Naz
9. "Little Red" Lopez
10. J. Famechon

Honors: "Ñato" Marcel, Winstone, Luisito, "Mantecas" Medina, Baby Arizmendi & Jorge Paez.

Yeah but Mick the title of the thread says greatest ever! Not who you seen!

So for me its Pep!

Can I ask why you don't rate those others at this weight?

Armstrong started & fought at feather for 8 years! Most of his wins came at this weight. He was even named fighter of the year in '37 whilst still at feather. He beat guys like Sarron, Wright, Arizmendi. Armstrongs record at feather is just as good if not better than at welter!

Miller just look at his numbers & who he fought & beat at feather!

Chocolate was probably a better Jr Lightweight but he was an awesome feather too & at his best he would have hung with any featherweight in history!

[CutMeMick]

Yeah but Mick the title of the thread says greatest ever! Not who you seen! So for me its Pep!
Can I ask why you don't rate those others at this weight?

Def. Galaxy I read the title of the thread.
I can't and wont argue if people want to rate fighters like Pep, Saddler, Bassey, Miller etc. etc. Everyone has their own reasons and ways to compiling a list.
I don't rate them because how can I compare what I see on my screen (as far as names, wins and loses vs. someone whom my eyes have seen fight I see what they can do and what they can't do). I can only read how good these fighters were. As I've said before these articles/reports were written hundreds of years ago by not so acredited writers. I also remember reading a report on SRR fight by 2 different writers during his career in the 1940s and the 2 writers told almost 2 differend fights it was like they both had seen 2 different fights, now mind you this was the 1940 now imagine articles/reports from the 1800's & 1900's? These guys could exaggerate and write just about anything. I don't argue the fact that they werent great fighters like Greb, Loughran, McVea you name them but how do we REALLY know these writters didn't exaggerate?

Which is why I would just rather stick to fighters I've seen fights of and know about. It's just my opinion and how I rate fighters. I can't compare a fighter I've seen vs. A fighter I've read about that to me is impossible and I refuse to go by someone elses words. I'd rather let my own eyes and mind decide.

Armstrong started & fought at feather for 8 years! Most of his wins came at this weight. He was even named fighter of the year in '37 whilst still at feather. He beat guys like Sarron, Wright, Arizmendi. Armstrongs record at feather is just as good if not better than at welter!

I've just always been more impressed with Henrys work as a Welterweight I def. agree that his work at Feather is top caliber but I'm more pleasead with his work at the other weight and I've rated him as such.
Maybe it's time I give Henrys career at Feather a 2nd look.

Miller just look at his numbers & who he fought & beat at feather!

Chocolate was probably a better Jr Lightweight but he was an awesome feather too & at his best he would have hung with any featherweight in history!

Miller I've not seen enough of to have him listed...
I can def. see by his career he was def. a top fighter but numbers and names can only tell you so much...
Chocolate was def. a better Jr. Light his opposition there and record exceeds that of his Feather career.

[Galaxy]

Yeah but Mick the title of the thread says greatest ever! Not who you seen! So for me its Pep!
Can I ask why you don't rate those others at this weight?

Def. Galaxy I read the title of the thread.
I can't and wont argue if people want to rate fighters like Pep, Saddler, Bassey, Miller etc. etc. Everyone has their own reasons and ways to compiling a list.
I don't rate them because how can I compare what I see on my screen (as far as names, wins and loses vs. someone whom my eyes have seen fight I see what they can do and what they can't do). I can only read how good these fighters were. As I've said before these articles/reports were written hundreds of years ago by not so acredited writers. I also remember reading a report on SRR fight by 2 different writers during his career in the 1940s and the 2 writers told almost 2 differend fights it was like they both had seen 2 different fights, now mind you this was the 1940 now imagine articles/reports from the 1800's & 1900's? These guys could exaggerate and write just about anything. I don't argue the fact that they werent great fighters like Greb, Loughran, McVea you name them but how do we REALLY know these writters didn't exaggerate?

Which is why I would just rather stick to fighters I've seen fights of and know about. It's just my opinion and how I rate fighters. I can't compare a fighter I've seen vs. A fighter I've read about that to me is impossible and I refuse to go by someone elses words. I'd rather let my own eyes and mind decide.

Armstrong started & fought at feather for 8 years! Most of his wins came at this weight. He was even named fighter of the year in '37 whilst still at feather. He beat guys like Sarron, Wright, Arizmendi. Armstrongs record at feather is just as good if not better than at welter!

I've just always been more impressed with Henrys work as a Welterweight I def. agree that his work at Feather is top caliber but I'm more pleasead with his work at the other weight and I've rated him as such.
Maybe it's time I give Henrys career at Feather a 2nd look.

Miller just look at his numbers & who he fought & beat at feather!

Chocolate was probably a better Jr Lightweight but he was an awesome feather too & at his best he would have hung with any featherweight in history!

Miller I've not seen enough of to have him listed...
I can def. see by his career he was def. a top fighter but numbers and names can only tell you so much...
Chocolate was def. a better Jr. Light his opposition there and record exceeds that of his Feather career.

I respect where your coming from Mick about seeing fighters fight 1st hand. But research can give you a lot of insight! Like I said in my original post Sanchez is the best feather I've seen. But for me it would be a discredit to those other fighters not to recognise their achievements just because I haven't seen them! Especially when considering the greatest ever!

[X]

The best ever that I have seen was Azumah Nelson (Barry McGuigan did the right thing to cross the road every time he saw him coming along). I thought he had everything - technique, speed, power, chin, guts and he was always fit and ready to fight. A real great great fighter. I would rank Eusebio Pedroza just behind him.

I know all about Pep and Armstrong and those guys, but I have stopped short of comparing them to Nelson as I have not seen enough footage of the right quality and length to have a proper opinion. Mind you, Armstrong would be in many people's top 5 fighters of all time, irrespective of weight I guess and Pep, Saddler and those would not be far off.

Some great great featherweights throughout history.

[rjj tszyu]

The best ever that I have seen was Azumah Nelson (Barry McGuigan did the right thing to cross the road every time he saw him coming along). I thought he had everything - technique, speed, power, chin, guts and he was always fit and ready to fight. A real great great fighter. I would rank Eusebio Pedroza just behind him.

I know all about Pep and Armstrong and those guys, but I have stopped short of comparing them to Nelson as I have not seen enough footage of the right quality and length to have a proper opinion. Mind you, Armstrong would be in many people's top 5 fighters of all time, irrespective of weight I guess and Pep, Saddler and those would not be far off.

Some great great featherweights throughout history.

Azumah was great I've got to agree! But better than Sanchez? I don't know!

Sanchez did beat him!