Aaron Pryor

[donnydarkoIRL]

I think in their respective primes, I think Holmes is the better technical fighter & I think he outpoints Tyson in a fairly close fight, as if you can take a Shavers punch you can take Tyson's. However, I've often thought that he struggled with guys that maybe he should have dealt with better & quicker, perhaps because of a loss of concentration. Thinking particularly of the Weaver fight, & as high as I rate him, I felt that he lost to the only 2 real prime & elite boxers he fought in Norton & Spinks (although I think he won the rematch).

I don't think conditioning was on the same level, especially as they had less preparation time. I agree on the basis of scientific improvements to an extent, however, I think boxing has probably seen the least 'improvement' in conditioning in that it was always superior in most respects to other sports (not saying there hasn't been any, but skipping, padwork, bagwork, roadwork have all been mainstays for nearly a century). There were also of course no 'supplements' to aid their training back then

I certainly don't see Hagler taking SRR out, he had a solid chin & heart to get up when dropped, his only loss being as a result of dehydration in a fight in which the ref retired before he did. He was winning btw. I think Hagler would have given him a lot of trouble, but I see Robinson just edging it on the scorecards. I think he would have disposed of Duran handily as long as he's focused, the biggest problem he seemed to face in his prime was himself. Also I've remembered on the corruption, I believe the reason SRR struggled to get shots at the title was because he didn't co-operate with the mafia. Makes his record all the more impressive.

Have you seen more of Pep than SRR? Because I've found him difficult to find any footage of. I have heard the 2 of them fought in the amateurs. Nowadays that fight would get made at catchweight

Agreec with Tyson v Holmes.
On that point I think Holmes was a fighter that performed to the level of competition. To get the best from Holmes required the most difficult of fighters.


Surely the metghods remain the same skipping roadwork etc. But the method in which they are utilised have changed dramatically.
Aerobic fitness was seen as the key in the past, where as modern trainers recognise the duality of aerobic and anaerobic conditioning.
Supplementation is another advantage enjoyed by the modern fighter, although as all modern athletes utilse advanced nutrition it can't be seen as a huge advantage nowadays. More of a necessary training utensil.

The existing footage of SRR is primarily from his MW days. In this footage I've seen a fighter that moves primarily to the left, who does get clipped and who's primary advantge seemed to be his speed.
I saw none of the ring saavy that would suggest he could stay away from Hagler's constant power.
HagleR took out many MW's in brutal, attritional fashion, I see very few surviving SRR's constant barrage of educated punishment.

Yeah I've seen quite a bit of Pep. Obviously its impossible to get all of his fights which is tragic, but the newspaper reports, although in awe of him are fairly reliable.
I've done all I can to hunt down as much as I can on Pep.
I would kill to have seen him live!

[JazMerkin]

Agreec with Tyson v Holmes.
On that point I think Holmes was a fighter that performed to the level of competition. To get the best from Holmes required the most difficult of fighters.


Surely the metghods remain the same skipping roadwork etc. But the method in which they are utilised have changed dramatically.
Aerobic fitness was seen as the key in the past, where as modern trainers recognise the duality of aerobic and anaerobic conditioning.
Supplementation is another advantage enjoyed by the modern fighter, although as all modern athletes utilse advanced nutrition it can't be seen as a huge advantage nowadays. More of a necessary training utensil.

The existing footage of SRR is primarily from his MW days. In this footage I've seen a fighter that moves primarily to the left, who does get clipped and who's primary advantge seemed to be his speed.
I saw none of the ring saavy that would suggest he could stay away from Hagler's constant power.
HagleR took out many MW's in brutal, attritional fashion, I see very few surviving SRR's constant barrage of educated punishment.

Yeah I've seen quite a bit of Pep. Obviously its impossible to get all of his fights which is tragic, but the newspaper reports, although in awe of him are fairly reliable.
I've done all I can to hunt down as much as I can on Pep.
I would kill to have seen him live!

I definitely agree that things have improved, I just don't think its to the extent that they were considerably worse than modern fighters, particularly the club fighters.

Whilst had great constant power, I think that the really elite fighters he faced were smart enough to avoid it enough to go the distance, with the exception of Hearns in their war. SRR does get clipped, but you have to bare in mind that this was a guy able to take punches off guys occasionally nearly 20lbs heavier & keep going in & he generally seemed to allow himself to get clipped because he knew he could, similar to Hagler in that respect. I don't think there's a chance either gets KO'd, maybe a KD for Hagler, but I really see no way that he gets taken out, his chin & heart were too good for that. I also think he was a guy who's ability was all natural, & give him a few sessions with some of the trainers of today & he would adapt. He tended to move to the left primarily because you had fewer southpaws or left-handed orthodox fighters. I think his record shows the guy was smart enough to adapt. At MW, I think he outpoints Hagler in a very close fight which could go either way, & whilst do rate SRR better P4P, I think Hagler is the greater MW.

I do find it a bit odd that you will give Pep credit on newspaper reports, but not SRR on legend of those who saw him. I can understand your logic though, because I do the same thing in ranking Sanchez ahead of Pep as the greatest FW of all time, so I guess we're both guilty of a bit of hypocrisy there.