Nice McGuigan Cruz Piece Up At Guardian

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/the-balls-of-wrath/2015/apr/13/great-rounds-boxing-history-barry-mcguigan-steve-cruz-15

It always puzzled me how McGuigan, a guy that beat opponents by having the heating turned up in the Kings Hall, succumbed to heat. How ironic.....

hazharrison wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/sport/the-balls-of-wrath/2015/apr/13/great-rounds-boxing-history-barry-mcguigan-steve-cruz-15

It always puzzled me how McGuigan, a guy that beat opponents by having the heating turned up in the Kings Hall, succumbed to heat. How ironic.....

An old call girl ploy

Probably Stevie Cruz being a hispanic who resided in the 4th hottest state in America that borders four Mexican states may have something to do with it...

Not sure putting up the heat in Belfast would have been an issue with him..

140 degree heat when McGuigan entered the ring, an hour before the fight Cruz's odds went from 9/1 to 2/1, tells me someone knew something wasn't right.

McGuigan should have been pulled out a week before, damaged knee never sparred for a fortnight problems with a damaged ear, rank bad management.

Nico the gman wrote:140 degree heat when McGuigan entered the ring, an hour before the fight Cruz's odds went from 9/1 to 2/1, tells me someone knew something wasn't right.

McGuigan should have been pulled out a week before, damaged knee never sparred for a fortnight problems with a damaged ear, rank bad management.

Should have paced himself better..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Nico the gman wrote:140 degree heat when McGuigan entered the ring, an hour before the fight Cruz's odds went from 9/1 to 2/1, tells me someone knew something wasn't right.

McGuigan should have been pulled out a week before, damaged knee never sparred for a fortnight problems with a damaged ear, rank bad management.

Should have paced himself better..

He was knackered before he got in the ring, smiling assassin Barney Eastwood has a lot to answer for, McGuigan would have taken Cruz apart anywhere in Europe, Cruz a lucky champion IMO, 2nd knockdown a punch doesn't even land.

How did he fight 15 tough rounds If he was knackered before it started..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:How did he fight 15 tough rounds If he was knackered before it started..

He was in bad shape before he entered the ring damaged ear drum, problems with knee injury preventing road work and sparring for 2 weeks meant he wouldn't and couldn't have been 100%.

Watched the fight live early hours of the morning, McGuigan is in the corner stressed out and telling his trainer I have no power, like McGuigan or not power was something Barry alway's had, its something you don't lose overnight.

I stick by my opinion, ranks as bad management. IMO most trainers or managers would not have allowed their fighter in the ring if they weren't 100%, particularily in a World title fight, absolute stupidity on Eastwoods part.

The boxer himself has to take responsibility in that situation and say he's not fit to fight, no doubt his management asked him the question and obviously he said yes.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The boxer himself has to take responsibility in that situation and say he's not fit to fight, no doubt his management asked him the question and obviously he said yes.

Stupidity allround then.

Nico the gman wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:How did he fight 15 tough rounds If he was knackered before it started..

He was in bad shape before he entered the ring damaged ear drum, problems with knee injury preventing road work and sparring for 2 weeks meant he wouldn't and couldn't have been 100%.

Watched the fight live early hours of the morning, McGuigan is in the corner stressed out and telling his trainer I have no power, like McGuigan or not power was something Barry alway's had, its something you don't lose overnight.

I stick by my opinion, ranks as bad management. IMO most trainers or managers would not have allowed their fighter in the ring if they weren't 100%, particularily in a World title fight, absolute stupidity on Eastwoods part.

For a guy that was so out of shape he...............

1. Only had to stay on his feet in the 15th to win the fight..
2. Lasted the whole 15 rounds at a tough pace in hot conditions..

I have no doubts Cruz loses in a colder climate......

But it's a fact that when Bernard Taylor the runner visited Belfast......The heat was turned up over 100............

Have lttle sympathy for Barry........ When you live by the sword........

With you on this one Truss. To me I see a guy bouncing around on his feet throwing some pretty sharp punches in the 15th - he didn't look like a guy that was out on his feet with exhaustion. Not to mention he dragged himself back in the fight a few times with that relentless style of his.

He just got beaten fair and square. Great great man for what he did during the troubles, but not a top 20 Brit fighter in my eyes and gets a bit of a nostalgic hand when it comes to his boxing career.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Nico the gman wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:How did he fight 15 tough rounds If he was knackered before it started..

He was in bad shape before he entered the ring damaged ear drum, problems with knee injury preventing road work and sparring for 2 weeks meant he wouldn't and couldn't have been 100%.

Watched the fight live early hours of the morning, McGuigan is in the corner stressed out and telling his trainer I have no power, like McGuigan or not power was something Barry alway's had, its something you don't lose overnight.

I stick by my opinion, ranks as bad management. IMO most trainers or managers would not have allowed their fighter in the ring if they weren't 100%, particularily in a World title fight, absolute stupidity on Eastwoods part.

For a guy that was so out of shape he...............

1. Only had to stay on his feet in the 15th to win the fight..
2. Lasted the whole 15 rounds at a tough pace in hot conditions..

I have no doubts Cruz loses in a colder climate......

But it's a fact that when Bernard Taylor the runner visited Belfast......The heat was turned up over 100............

Have lttle sympathy for Barry........ When you live by the sword........

Is that really a fact? I'd dispute that unless you can evidence it? McGuigan has already said it's a load of rubbish. Why would an Irish fighter thrive in the heat while an American floundered? Doesn't make any sense.

Coxy001 wrote:With you on this one Truss. To me I see a guy bouncing around on his feet throwing some pretty sharp punches in the 15th - he didn't look like a guy that was out on his feet with exhaustion. Not to mention he dragged himself back in the fight a few times with that relentless style of his.

He just got beaten fair and square. Great great man for what he did during the troubles, but not a top 20 Brit fighter in my eyes and gets a bit of a nostalgic hand when it comes to his boxing career.

He got carried on a stretcher to an ambulance and had an oxygen mask put on him, was taken to hospital suffering from severe dehydration, or maybe he'd pulled the wool over the paramedics and doctors eyes and was faking it.

Looked unrecognizable from the fighter he had become, Cruz should have been an easy defence he wasn't that good, McGuigan was in the US to elevate his status, McGuigan and his camp carried on with the fight rather than pull out, because it was  big US boxing bill, they  made a huge mistake and paid for it.

Because Taylor was a runner...probably

Thought it was a well known fact they turned the heat up in The King's hall that night.....

Taylor said he couldn't breathe....Journalists remarked how hot it was !!

Ko and Ring both ran stories on how hypocritical it was for McGuigan to blame the heat...against the cab driver..

But If Barry said it wasn't true there you go.........Doesn't matter now !!

Did have the KO magazine..........Where they were taking the p**s think it was Oct 86...

My Wife chucked them all out..

[quote="TRUSSMAN66"]Because Taylor was a runner...probably

Thought it was a well known fact they turned the heat up in The King's hall that night.....

Taylor said he couldn't breathe....Journalists remarked how hot it was !!

Ko and Ring both ran stories on how hypocritical it was for McGuigan to blame the heat...against the cab driver..

But If Barry said it wasn't true there you go.........Doesn't matter now !!

Did have the KO magazine..........Where they were taking the p**s think it was Oct 86...

My Wife chucked them all out..[/quote]
Probably saw the words "ring and "fist" and thought "Oh no, not this again!"

Nico the gman wrote:

Coxy001 wrote:With you on this one Truss. To me I see a guy bouncing around on his feet throwing some pretty sharp punches in the 15th - he didn't look like a guy that was out on his feet with exhaustion. Not to mention he dragged himself back in the fight a few times with that relentless style of his.

He just got beaten fair and square. Great great man for what he did during the troubles, but not a top 20 Brit fighter in my eyes and gets a bit of a nostalgic hand when it comes to his boxing career.

He got carried on a stretcher to an ambulance and had an oxygen mask put on him, was taken to hospital suffering from severe dehydration, or maybe he'd pulled the wool over the paramedics and doctors eyes and was faking it.

Looked unrecognizable from the fighter he had become, Cruz should have been an easy defence he wasn't that good, McGuigan was in the US to elevate his status, McGuigan and his camp carried on with the fight rather than pull out, because it was  big US boxing bill, they  made a huge mistake and paid for it.

You're remembering McGuigan in a lot better light than I remember him. He looked great on the way up, his best fight for me, was against Laporte. But when he became champ he never looked as good. I always thought it was because it was easier to pick your opponents on the way up, but when you're champ you can't pick and chose your opponents as much. As a result, I thought he looked good but not great when he started to make his title defences.

Cruz might have beaten McGuigan whenever they fought, in an American arena with cold air conditioning or in the Kings Hall Belfast, there have been bigger upsets in boxing. If Cruz was such an easy opponent how come there was no rematch?

Atila wrote:

Nico the gman wrote:

Coxy001 wrote:With you on this one Truss. To me I see a guy bouncing around on his feet throwing some pretty sharp punches in the 15th - he didn't look like a guy that was out on his feet with exhaustion. Not to mention he dragged himself back in the fight a few times with that relentless style of his.

He just got beaten fair and square. Great great man for what he did during the troubles, but not a top 20 Brit fighter in my eyes and gets a bit of a nostalgic hand when it comes to his boxing career.

He got carried on a stretcher to an ambulance and had an oxygen mask put on him, was taken to hospital suffering from severe dehydration, or maybe he'd pulled the wool over the paramedics and doctors eyes and was faking it.

Looked unrecognizable from the fighter he had become, Cruz should have been an easy defence he wasn't that good, McGuigan was in the US to elevate his status, McGuigan and his camp carried on with the fight rather than pull out, because it was  big US boxing bill, they  made a huge mistake and paid for it.

You're remembering McGuigan in a lot better light than I remember him. He looked great on the way up, his best fight for me, was against Laporte. But when he became champ he never looked as good. I always thought it was because it was easier to pick your opponents on the way up, but when you're champ you can't pick and chose your opponents as much. As a result, I thought he looked good but not great when he started to make his title defences.

Cruz might have beaten McGuigan whenever they fought, in an American arena with cold air conditioning or in the Kings Hall Belfast, there have been bigger upsets in boxing. If Cruz was such an easy opponent how come there was no rematch?

You have to be a good fighter to beat Laporte and put Pedroza on his arse, I think you'll find McGuigan earned his title shot by fighting top 10 world rank fighters not getting it handed to him on a plate.

Gets on my wick on here the way McGuigan gets slated its shocking,he actually stopped his mandatory Bernard Taylor, whether people like it or not.
The McGuigan I watched was a little Irishman who was exciting to watch.

Pedrosa was an old man....

Taylor boxed Mcguigan's head off for the first five rounds before he ran out of breath because it was so hot..

Mcguigan was a good fighter who was lucky Cruz got to him before Nelson spanked his ears off !!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Pedrosa was an old man....

Taylor boxed Mcguigan's head off for the first five rounds before he ran out of breath because it was so hot..

Mcguigan was a good fighter who was  lucky Cruz got to him before Nelson spanked his ears off !!

Taylor was losing on all 3 judges scorecards when he was pulled out, that's how it was right or wrong. Taylor was creased in half by a solar plexus body punch.

McGuigan must have had a massive advantage living in a hot country like Northern Ireland, and Taylor coming from the cold climate of North Carolina, I hope Taylor moved when he got back home, the heat must be a nightmare for him.

Nelson beating McGuigan don't see what the relevance is in this post.

McGuigan was a tremendous fighter. He wasn't ever the same after Pedroza (in the same way Hatton wasn't the same after Tszyu). It isn't often British/Irish fighters become kings of a weight division; even rarer against great fighters. McGuigan reached his mountain top and, like Hatton, that coupled with his style caused him to burn out quickly.

The Taylor accusation is a nonsense, as is the theory that the Vegas heat didn't cost Barry the Cruz fight.

Some people would argue black was white. Incredible.

hazharrison wrote:McGuigan was a tremendous fighter. He wasn't ever the same after Pedroza (in the same way Hatton wasn't the same after Tszyu). It isn't often British/Irish fighters become kings of a weight division; even rarer against great fighters. McGuigan reached his mountain top and, like Hatton, that coupled with his style caused him to burn out quickly.

The Taylor accusation is a nonsense, as is the theory that the Vegas heat didn't cost Barry the Cruz fight.

Some people would argue black was white. Incredible.

In total agreement Haz, was at Loftus road the night he won the title, he was as near to perfection and punch perfect as he could have been that night. McGuigan admitted himself recently (in a boxing magazine) that he doesn't think he would have beat Nelson, but then again not many featherweights would either.

"He wasn't the same after Pedrosa" "peaked"..............One fight against an overrated , past it, joke of a great !! and he's tremendous..

How can he be compared to Hatton..........Hatton lost to the top two fighters in the game..

Not a cab driver...

Excuses, excuses for every fighter you like !!!! ...................No excuses for every fighter you don't !!!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:"He wasn't the same after Pedrosa" "peaked"..............One fight against an overrated , past it, joke of a great !! and he's tremendous..

How can he be compared to Hatton..........Hatton lost to the top two fighters in the game..

Not a cab driver...

Excuses, excuses for every fighter you like !!!! ...................No excuses for every fighter you don't !!!

McGuigan fought he's way up the rankings beating top 10 world ranked fighters but they don't count on your record, and beat Juan LaPorte for the right to fight for the title.Was great to see him beat the 29year old so called oldman  Pedrosa.

So Cruz was a cab driver not a boxer, how the hell did he get a world ranking driving a cab, something fishy about that..

Juan Laporte was a Pedrosa victim......I saw the stinker............

If I beat Jo Jo Dan I'd have beaten a top 10 fighter...........

I like Laporte I saw him fight !! .......

He was 1-2 coming into the fight with Mcguigan..He'd just lost to Gerald Hayes !!

Mate don't try and spin me.............

Anyone who claims Eusebio Pedroza was a joke isn't worth debating with.

Mcguigan is a bit over rated largely because Pedroza is ridiculously over rated.

Jo Jo Dan."lol".

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Mcguigan is a bit over rated largely because Pedroza is ridiculously over rated.

Yours sincerely, a Hopkins fan.

Hopkins is a damn sight better than Pedrosa....

"But he was a linear champ and I know a respected journalist that likes him !!"

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Hopkins is a damn sight better than Pedrosa....

"But he was a linear champ and I know a respected journalist that likes him !!"

Pedroza rates close to Nelson all-time (and there's usually a lot of fawning over Azumah on here). Pedroza shared a lot of traits with the early middleweight Hopkins). I find it rich to claim EP was overrated from Hopkins fans. Pedroza was a quality operator who took his title on the road - gritty, dirty and tough to beat.

hazharrison wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Hopkins is a damn sight better than Pedrosa....

"But he was a linear champ and I know a respected journalist that likes him !!"

Pedroza rates close to Nelson all-time (and there's usually a lot of fawning over Azumah on here). Pedroza shared a lot of traits with the early middleweight Hopkins). I find it rich to claim EP was overrated from Hopkins fans. Pedroza was a quality operator who took his title on the road - gritty, dirty and tough to beat.

That's the problem Haz if you debate with people who can't see the wood for the trees your wasting your time, Pedroza and Laporte became 2 bums overnight after McGuigan beat them.

The word bum has definitely been used to refer to the pair, Laporte was a decent operator but that's it while Pedroza was a very good but not great champion. The problem Mcguigan has is being one of the worst IBHOF inductees and because of that he gets compared to others in the hall of fame, he was a good champion but his reputation outweighs his ability.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The word bum has definitely been used to refer to the pair, Laporte was a decent operator but that's it while Pedroza was a very good but not great champion. The problem Mcguigan has is being one of the worst IBHOF inductees and because of that he gets compared to others in the hall of fame, he was a good champion but his reputation outweighs his ability.

Pedroza defended his title 20 times, Laporte some of the best for the title. McGuigan is far away from a HOF, the post was about the Cruz fight not how McGuigan rates with HOF's, nothing to do with hall of famers, if we were debating how McGuigan compares with the greatest Featherweights of all time, then I would hold my hand up and say he doesn't.

Pedroza's actual world championship reign is poor Nico, when Laporte, Lockridge and a years past his best Olivares are your best wins you know the level of opposition is quite low. The thing is a hall of famer losing to Steve Cruz is a big deal as it shouldn't happen, had he not been inducted then I think people would give Mcguigan a bit more slack.

Nico the gman wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The word bum has definitely been used to refer to the pair, Laporte was a decent operator but that's it while Pedroza was a very good but not great champion. The problem Mcguigan has is being one of the worst IBHOF inductees and because of that he gets compared to others in the hall of fame, he was a good champion but his reputation outweighs his ability.

Pedroza defended his title 20 times, Laporte some of the best for the title. McGuigan is far away from a HOF, the post was about the Cruz fight not how McGuigan rates with HOF's, nothing to do with hall of famers, if we were debating how McGuigan compares with the greatest Featherweights of all time, then I would hold my hand up and say he doesn't.

He is hugely appreciated by most of those that actually watched his fights and follwed his career.

catchweight wrote:

Nico the gman wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The word bum has definitely been used to refer to the pair, Laporte was a decent operator but that's it while Pedroza was a very good but not great champion. The problem Mcguigan has is being one of the worst IBHOF inductees and because of that he gets compared to others in the hall of fame, he was a good champion but his reputation outweighs his ability.

Pedroza defended his title 20 times, Laporte some of the best for the title. McGuigan is far away from a HOF, the post was about the Cruz fight not how McGuigan rates with HOF's, nothing to do with hall of famers, if we were debating how McGuigan compares with the greatest Featherweights of all time, then I would hold my hand up and say he doesn't.

He is hugely appreciated by most of those that actually watched his fights and follwed his career.

Here, Here, definitely a household name in Britain, well liked, just like Hatton, gave great value for money exciting to watch never in a dull fight.

Does that mean he is beyond criticism then Nico because he was a household name, never understood Hatton being exciting to be honest; watching him wrestle for 12 rounds was anything by exciting.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Does that mean he is beyond criticism then Nico because he was a household name, never understood Hatton being exciting to be honest; watching him wrestle for 12 rounds was anything by exciting.

Yours sincerely, a Hopkins fan....

Pedroza is one of the top ten featherweights of all time.

I have time for Barry....Just think Pedrosa was a stinker that never beat anybody and Laporte was a good trialhorse who was 1 - 2 going in..

A decent champ Barry but no HOFer..

I will complain though that anybody that deliberately tries to mislead by wilfully omitting stuff from articles and anyone that thinks Murray is a better win than the third best fighter in the world..

Is a complete numpty..

Does haz realise that truss and hammy have both served their porridge on here?

I'm sure he'll be back to enlighten the misguided fools of v2 and tackle the rude and abusive ring leaders with his own easygoing brand of charm.

I for one will be very disappointed if he was to leave without the decency to follow protocol with his own 'retirement' thread.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Does that mean he is beyond criticism then Nico because he was a household name, never understood Hatton being exciting to be honest; watching him wrestle for 12 rounds was anything by exciting.

When did I actually say McGuigan was beyond criticism, I made an opinion about the Steve Cruz fight, based on facts, since that opinion its turned into McGuigan's Hof status, what Nelson would have done to him etc etc, the post was about McGuigan v Cruz, who McGuigan would or wouldn't have beat is irrelevant.

If the debate was about McGuigan v Nelson, that's a pretty easy one for me even as a McGuigan fan, Nelson beats him, should McGuigan be a HOF then IMO, definitely no.

hazharrison wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Hopkins is a damn sight better than Pedrosa....

"But he was a linear champ and I know a respected journalist that likes him !!"

Pedroza rates close to Nelson all-time (and there's usually a lot of fawning over Azumah on here). Pedroza shared a lot of traits with the early middleweight Hopkins). I find it rich to claim EP was overrated from Hopkins fans. Pedroza was a quality operator who took his title on the road - gritty, dirty and tough to beat.

What a load of bollox..............

Draw with Bernard Taylor..............A stinker with Laporte..........and a contentious decison over Lockridge...

For a guy who slags off Wladimir...........Interesting you revere another guy that trades on LONGEVITY !!

Then again Pedrosa is from the past...........Wlad is a modern fighter..

I think retrospective views on Pedroza are probably a shade harsher than they should be because of the Sanchez factor. The idea goes that Pedroza should just be thankful that Sanchez never had the chance to come a'knocking and that he was basically just the B-side guy of that era. The fact that he wasn't as attractive and as patently skilled or natural a fighter as Sanchez didn't help, either. But as others have said, while he might miss out on a top ten spot at Featherweight all-time, it can't be by that much. Not an all-time great across all divisions, but a great Featherweight? There's a strong argument to be made there.

Not seen the first Lockridge fight myself, but I thought Pedroza was good value for a win in their return. He also didn't look like some lucky, treading water fighter when he knocked ten bells out of Ford, who was good enough to give Sanchez absolute fits and only lose via a not altogether popular verdict, as much because of him gassing rather than anything great that Sanchez did. Yeah yeah, I know. Sanchez fought to the level of his opponent, overlooked him, had his eye on something else, didn't feel threatened so felt no need to move through the gears and all that jazz.

Hey, I used to be a bit more firmly in that camp as well, but I don't see why Sanchez routinely gets a free pass for an awful showing against Ford, a split decision (admittedly deserved, but largely due to that fifteenth round knockdown) with a late replacement in Cowdell and another very close fight against Castillo while Pedroza's close shaves and struggles with Lockridge and Taylor are held under big-time scrutiny. Not as if Lockridge or Taylor were no-marks, either. The Taylor draw took place in Taylor's home town and while a share of the spoils was no disgrace, I've not really come across too many people who felt that Taylor won it.

I don't actually mind that they're brought up with regards to Pedroza, I'll stress, becasue they are indicators of his falabilities and show why he's not quite in the absolute elite bracket of 126 pounders. But that being the case, the less than stellar showings by a peak Sanchez should be given a bit of a sterner examination from time to time as well. Consensus is that, had they ever met, Sanchez would have done a complete job on Pedroza, but while I'd back him to win I think there's enough evidence to suggest that it'd be a hard fight.

Sanchez was a greater fighter with a superior record to Pedroza, and demonstrably more gifted to boot, but that doesn't disqualify the possibility of him losing to Pedroza based on styles and how each man's particular strengths / weaknesses match up to the other's. Pedroza was a rough and dirty handful, had tremendous stamina and conditioning, had good footwork, was capable of good upper body movement (not consistent with it, in fairness) and had a very good counter left hook. Plenty for Sanchez to think about.

I'm looking at a record full of stiffs..Nothing to do with Sanchez..

Sanchez does have Lopez, Gomez and an admittedly green Nelson to fall back on Chris, when you struggle against the best you faced I feel it's more indicative of your level rather than dominating them.

I am firmly in the Sanchez fighting to his opponents level camp and don't think Pedroza would stand much of a chance, the Mexican hatred for Panamanians has to be factored in also.

The big positive for Pedroza is his record number of defences but how much does that really matter when you didn't face Lopez, Sanchez, Gomez or Nelson? He also didn't fancy venturing up north to face Arguello or even the second tier 130lbers like Limon, Chacon or Boza-Edwards. To me it is no coincidence that all of those guys were tough, resillient and could punch, it's also no coincidence that he didn't really fight any top level punchers at Featherweight.

The term great gets thrown around all too often and Pedroza is a telling example of that, he doesn't rate highly in any single area aside from title defences. A couple of good but not great opponents, reasonably talented but usually awful to watch and zero divisional dominance. Hamed gets a bad rep for quitting once he lost but Pedroza and Saldivar are just as guilty of that, it gets forgotten because they had ill fated comebacks. I prefer to reserve the term great for the very best not just the very good, hell i've been in two minds about Wilfred Benitez's greatness now for years and he's levels above Pedroza.

As a final point, if we are calling Pedroza great then by the same measure Naseem Hamed is also great and I doubt that sits well with anyone aside from myself.

I said there was an argument to be made (not the same thing as saying he IS great) that Pedroza is a great Featherweight, Hammersmith. Not a great in the overall sense. Just as Don Curry could arguably be called a great Welter without breaching all-time great status irrespective of weight like only the truly elite do. Same with Maxie Rosenbloom at Light-Heavy, Joe Brown at Lightweight, Freddie Steele at Middle and so on. For what it's worth, I don't object to anyone calling Hamed a great Featherweight, either. He may well rate higher than Pedroza for me if I had a think about ranking the 126 pounders.

I think it's reaching to start excusing Sanchez's lesser performances on the basis of him not disliking the nationality of his opponent. By that theory a fellow Mexican in Castillo should have brought out the very best in him due to bragging rights amongst their countrymen etc. I'd be more inclined to believe it if the likes of Castillo, Ford, Cowdell etc didn't all share a few similar traits and didn't all make Sanchez struggle with the jab, rangey and distance boxing etc. Maybe he just wasn't quite as brilliant (though still a good fighter) against that kind of fighter?

On the other side of the coin, the fighters against which Sanchez shone (and as I've said before, when he shone he did so as brightly as any fighter who has ever lived) such as Lopez, Gomez, Laporte and Nelson all had a style which wasn't a bad fit for Sal and his aggressive counter-punching. Still takes a special fighter to look as dazzling as he did in some of those fights (Lopez I and Gomez are amongst the greatest performances I've ever seen and I suspect they are for a lot of others, too) but something worth thinking about.

I wouldn't argue against Sanchez being a greater fighter, my point is that Pedroza probably has a harder time from historians as a result of being in Sal's shadow than he should have. Fighters that would be regarded as pretty solid wins for Sanchez (or Naz for that matter) are being written off as "stiffs" on Pedroza's record. There's a lot of filler on Pedroza's record, but there's some quality there as well. There are discrepancies on his record but that's not what I'm getting at here. I'm more focussed on the way in which McGuigan's win over him gets written off as nothing to write home about and how Pedroza is getting basically no credit for amassing a record which puts him inside the top fifteen Feathers ever for most people's money.

Not sure the purpose of chucking Ford at Sanchez either ????

I saw Bruce curry get ripped off against Benitez..........Lost a split with round scoring when If it had been Ten point must he'd have won a comfortable decision by four points.......I don't hold it against Benitez..

Tyson struggled with Tillis....Biggs didn't........Whoopy doo..

Styles make fights..

Scraping the barrel............