Willie Pep - Best BOXER Of All Time !

[Bill Butcher]

Most agree that Pep is the best ever FWT
Most agree that Pep is the best defensive boxer of all time
Im not 100% certain on this but I believe Pep has also got the best win/lose record in boxing history.
Gil Clancy has Pep no1 & Robinson no2 on his list.
The guy won a rd without throwing a punch, lets see Whitaker or Benitez try that & succeed.

He didnt have good KO power but he made up for it by being a supreme artist.

The name of the game is to hit & not be hit & there was NOBODY in boxings history better than Willie Pep at doing just that.

I personally rank Ray Robinson as the no1 FIGHTER because he was more complete than Pep but as far as BOXING goes, Willie Pep was the greatest of all time IMO.

Ray Robinson told Pep he was the best fighter p4p in a room full of people after they called Ray the best p4p.... Pep`s witty reply was... `I agree with Ray, I am the best.`

Ps. SRR beat Pep in the amatuers with a 20 lb + advantage but didnt KO him like he did most others his size.

Dont forget that the 4 Saddler fights took place after the horrific plane crash & Pep still won the best fight of the 4, the only man to ever do that to a peak Sandy.

:thumbsup

[Mantequilla]

Pep was great indeed, though i've always thought the winning a round without throwing a punch thing was just laughable in every respect.

One of the lamest of all boxing stories.

[Sweet Pea]

A lot of what you said was false, but yeah Pep was definitely among the best pure boxers of all time.

[McGrain]

He is up there.

[Robbi]

He's up there, right behind Whitaker.

[Thread Stealer]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Indeed, he was not a bum. In fact, for years legend had it that Pep actually won a round without throwing a single punch. That myth was debunked when a member of the International Boxing Research Organization (IBRO) researched Pep’s fight against Jackie Graves in 1946.


[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Jake Wegner: Willie says that in your fight, he won the third round without ever throwing a punch. Is that true? Do you remember? I don’t remember. It seems like that would be a very hard thing to do, but maybe it happened. A lot of times I can’t remember things anymore…I guess I would say that it probably did happen.

Jake Wegner: And why would you say that Jackie?

JG: Because I remember that it was really hard to hit him during that fight. The times that I did, I hit him pretty hard I think. But I do remember feeling confused and frustrated during the fight. I remember feeling embarrassed because I was fighting here in Minnesota with all my friends and family watching, and I felt foolish missing on my punches so much, and with so many watching.



Jackie Graves went on to have a stellar professional career, competing in the most talent-rich Featherweight era of all time, compiling a respectable 82-11-2 (48) record. He met the great Willie Pep in a non-title bout in 1946, twice knocking down the Featherweight King before succumbing to the Wisp’s assault, via TKO in the 8th. This was the legendary fight in which Pep allegedly won the third round without throwing a single punch. And until now, 99% of the boxing community has believed it. Including yours truly. But right after doing the Graves interview, I did something no one else has done up to this point…I read the newspaper’s round-by-round fight description by Joe Hennessy of the St. Paul Pioneer Press from the day after the fight (7-26-46). And guess what? Not only is there no mention at all in the entire sports section about the famous feat in the third round, but the exact opposite seems to have occurred. According to Hennessy, who sat ringside to report on the fight, this is what happened in the third round. “Graves pounded a left to the stomach that made Pep wince in the third. They mixed wildly. A clicker couldn’t count the blows. Pep punched Jack into the ropes as the most even round of the evening ended”. Not only is there no mention that Pep didn’t throw a punch, there is also no mention of defensive wizardry, no feints, no slips, no hiding behind the referee, no nothing!
In fact, Hennessy says that this was one of most fiercely fought rounds of the fight. “A clicker could not count the blows”, he said. And he specifically makes mention that it was Pep who, “punched Jack into the ropes as the most even round of the evening ended.” Still don’t believe it? I thought some may not. So I have provided below a scanned microfilm of the round by round by Hennessy. What makes this more interesting though, is the fact that the Pioneer Press is the newspaper that the well-known sports writer, Don Riley wrote for. Don Riley is the one most commonly credited for saying that Pep told him before the fight that he would not throw a punch in the third. But yet, no mention of a punchless Pep in the third round even by Riley himself. Pep himself after the fight says in Riley’s small piece on the fight that it took in four rounds to figure out Graves’ style.

[SuzieQ49]

Willie pep is underated offensivley, and extremley talented combination puncher. what pep accomplished after surviving a plane crash with a broken back is remarkable itself.

[SuzieQ49]

He's up there, right behind Whitaker.


The only thing pep's behind whitaker in is most lines blowed in one day.

[sweet_scientist]

Most of the people that have seen both Whitaker and Pep fight in their primes agree that Pep is the better boxer.

I've seen pretty much all there is to see of Pep on film and he does not look a better boxer than Whitaker. I can never understand people that try and make out a case that the post plane crash Pep that we see on film looks a better fighter than Whitaker. It's plain bullshit.

[Mantequilla]

He clearly looks on a special fighter(a bit like BUrley wiht the limited footage of him does).

But technically i don't really see anything that puts him above most of the other fighters i consider great defensively.Call me cynical, but i do tend to think that if some good prime footage of Pep surgaced where he happened to look identical to what Canto, Zapata, Whitaker or whoever did against random opponent Z. then you would get a certain contingent making "greatest boxing exhibition of all time " type claims...old school moves forgotten in the mists of time etc etc.

Obviously he will look better in his prime, but what sets him apart for me is his accomplishments with those skills.HE simply had a great, great career.

[Robbi]

Most of the people that have seen both Whitaker and Pep fight in their primes agree that Pep is the better boxer.

I've seen pretty much all there is to see of Pep on film and he does not look a better boxer than Whitaker. I can never understand people that try and make out a case that the post plane crash Pep that we see on film looks a better fighter than Whitaker. It's plain bullshit.

If Whitaker happened to be around in the 40's and 50's the his stock would rise. Even if he still only had 40+ fights with the same opponents on his record.

Some people just come to the conclusion Pep was better because he happened to be around boxing 50-60 years ago.

Even though Pep had over 200 fights his resume isn't better than Whitaker's although it's arguable.

[sweet_scientist]

The only thing pep's behind whitaker in is most lines blowed in one day.
And in the ability to not get ko'ed, quit or throw fights :good

[sweet_scientist]

If Whitaker happened to be around in the 40's and 50's the his stock would rise. Even if he still only had 40+ fights with the same opponents on his record.

Some people just come to the conclusion Pep was better because he happened to be around boxing 50-60 years ago.

Even though Pep had over 200 fights his resume isn't better than Whitaker's although it's arguable.

We haven't seen Pep in his prime or the level of many of his opponents so we can't really say definitively but there could be some truth to what you say.

[sweet_scientist]

He clearly looks on a special fighter(a bit like BUrley wiht the limited footage of him does).

But technically i don't really see anything that puts him above most of the other fighters i consider great defensively.Call me cynical, but i do tend to think that if some good prime footage of Pep surgaced where he happened to look identical to what Canto, Zapata, Whitaker or whoever did against random opponent Z. then you would get a certain contingent making "greatest boxing exhibition of all time " type claims...old school moves forgotten in the mists of time etc etc.

Obviously he will look better in his prime, but what sets him apart for me is his accomplishments with those skills.HE simply had a great, great career.

How do you assess his career accomplishments in comparison to Whitaker's? Assume (as I think you believe) he beat DLH. Does Pep still have the better career?

[Bummy Davis]

Willie Pep was the best pure boxer ever and he still had power but he was a master in the ring, head and shoulders over the rest. he was 62-0 before his 1st loss a close decision to Sammy Angott (Angotti) then went to 134-1-1- before losing to Sadler but beat Sadler in the rematch. His fights vs Sadler were gruiling and dirty but Pep still went on to have a final 229-11-1 record one of the best ever in boxing...Sugar Ray, Archie Moore had that type of steady longevity in boxing...Ray could be a devastating puncher and Moore was a slick fighter with a devastating punch but Pep was the master boxer # 1

[Bill Butcher]

Willie Pep was the best pure boxer ever and he still had power but he was a master in the ring, head and shoulders over the rest. he was 62-0 before his 1st loss a close decision to Sammy Angott (Angotti) then went to 134-1-1- before losing to Sadler but beat Sadler in the rematch. His fights vs Sadler were gruiling and dirty but Pep still went on to have a final 229-11-1 record one of the best ever in boxing...Sugar Ray, Archie Moore had that type of steady longevity in boxing...Ray could be a devastating puncher and Moore was a slick fighter with a devastating punch but Pep was the master boxer # 1

I agree :good

Ps. Thanks thread stealer for the info on Pep not throwing a punch, dont think it affects his ranking but cheers anyway.

I also have massive respect for Whitaker, he is 1 of my favoutites & does make my personal all time top 10 p4p but he is 2nd in boxings history to Pep in a defensive manner IMO.

I rank Pep 1-5 & have Pea 6-10 in my p4p all time list just for the record.

:thumbsup

[redrooter]

Pep was good, but Camacho was even better.

[salsanchezfan]

Pep was good, but Camacho was even better.



............."Rooter??" :lol:

PLease tell us the story behind this. What happened, ya get your account deleted or something?

[redrooter]

............."Rooter??" :lol:

PLease tell us the story behind this. What happened, ya get your account deleted or something?

Let's just say i am planning ahead of time.

It pays to be ready.

[JohnThomas1]

Let's just say i am planning ahead of time.

It pays to be ready.

:lol:

[Robbi]

Let's just say i am planning ahead of time.

It pays to be ready.

:bolt

[Bummy Davis]

Willie Pep was head and shoulders over Camacho, Whiaker, they were good but Willie fought his 1st 60 fights without a loss and did not lose his 2nd fight until he was 134-1-1......the fighters he beat in his era like Chalky Wright were great fighters

[Robbi]

Willie Pep was head and shoulders over Camacho, Whiaker, they were good but Willie fought his 1st 60 fights without a loss and did not lose his 2nd fight until he was 134-1-1......the fighters he beat in his era like Chalky Wright were great fighters

Whitaker would have had 60 fights without a loss if he was faced with the same quality of opponents at lightweight.

And Pep sure ain't head and shoulders above Whitaker in terms of boxing skill.

[brownpimp88]

Willie Pep was head and shoulders over Camacho, Whiaker, they were good but Willie fought his 1st 60 fights without a loss and did not lose his 2nd fight until he was 134-1-1......the fighters he beat in his era like Chalky Wright were great fighters
I agree, you can't rank Pernell higher than top 15 of all times. If he fought slightly better competition and was tested more against b+ and a- fighters, he would have a case to be better accomplishments wise, he didn't and thats the end all to be all.

[Robbi]

If Whitaker faced Saddler I'd bet my house on it that he wouldn't be finishing the fight looking like the Elephant Man as Pep did.

[Bill Butcher]

If Whitaker faced Saddler I'd bet my house on it that he wouldn't be finishing the fight looking like the Elephant Man as Pep did.

Lucky for some to have more than one house ;)


Pep was still very good but not in his prime after the plane crash in the Saddler fights.

Whitaker not in HIS prime or even in it could very well suffer the same fate vs Saddler (if they weighed the same) as Sandy was 1 of the ATGs aswell.

Pep never lost to no bum in there & HE DID give SS a boxing lesson of which he`d never had or would ever have again in his life to win the rematch.

No other 126 lber in history could do that to Saddler, who was a complete monster of a FWT.

Pep was the greatest pure boxer & FWT who ever lived.

:thumbsup

[Sweet Pea]

Whitaker was better at fighting off the backfoot than Pep, which is why he'd have dealt with a Saddler type better.

[sweet_scientist]

Whitaker was better at fighting off the backfoot than Pep, which is why he'd have dealt with a Saddler type better.

Had a better inside game and was more resilient too, though the fact hat he liked to get down and dirty on the inside might be a disadvantage here with Saddler.

Personally, I think avoiding all inside exchanges and using lots of lateral movement is the best way for a boxer to beat Saddler. Taking Saddler on at his own game is a great hazard.

[Robbi]

[Only registered and activated users can see links] (%3Ca%20href=)


Willie Pep's daddy

[JohnThomas1]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]


Willie Pep's daddy

Ramirez? I'm not so sure!!!

:D

[Bummy Davis]

Lets not forget Argentina's Nicolino Loche...pure boxing mast but Pep was LB 4 LB the Best...126lbs of platinum and diamonds

[sweet_scientist]

If we're taking accomplishments into account, I reckon Benny Leonard has a better case than Pep for this mantle.

I actually have Leonard above Pep on my p4p list.

[sweet_scientist]

Ramirez? I'm not so sure!!!

:D

Jose is Sandy's daddy :yep

[JohnThomas1]

Jose is Sandy's daddy :yep

:lol:

[Sweet Pea]

If we're taking accomplishments into account, I reckon Benny Leonard has a better case than Pep for this mantle.

I actually have Leonard above Pep on my p4p list.As do I.

[Sweet Pea]

Had a better inside game and was more resilient too, though the fact hat he liked to get down and dirty on the inside might be a disadvantage here with Saddler.

Personally, I think avoiding all inside exchanges and using lots of lateral movement is the best way for a boxer to beat Saddler. Taking Saddler on at his own game is a great hazard.Agreed, I think Whitaker was well smart enough to know his game though, as he showed against Nelson. I personally don't think anyone takes Saddler on the inside, Armstrong included. I think he'd be an awful matchup for Hank.

[sweet_scientist]

Agreed, I think Whitaker was well smart enough to know his game though, as he showed against Nelson. I personally don't think anyone takes Saddler on the inside, Armstrong included. I think he'd be an awful matchup for Hank.

That uppercut would really be murder for the crouching Armstrong. If he would manage to hang inside with Saddler, it would only be due to his incredible mettle. Physically he'd be broken down.

[SuzieQ49]

Even though Pep had over 200 fights his resume isn't better than Whitaker's although it's arguable.



Pep has by far the better resume its not even close. pep fought and beat all of the top fighters in his weight class of his era. Pernell Whitaker did not fight both the # 1 and # 2 lightweights of the 1980s, so he did not fully prove himself. Not to mention whitaker's much thinner resume doesnt match pep in quality or quantity. Who did whitaker beat that was as good as a prime sandy saddler?

[SuzieQ49]

pep had something whitaker did not.....offense. pep knew how to put fluid combinations together, and he knew how to always be active. Whitaker loved to clown and run, and though at times he showed flashes of sharp one punch counters(especially the left uppercut)......whitaker was never active or aggresive enough, all he showed he could do was make people miss punches without throwing any leather in return... willie also had better ring generalship than whitaker and was the smarter fighter and better footwork. Pep knew all the tricks in the book, and his duck unders/ spin his opponent manuevers were just plain genius.

[sweet_scientist]

Pep has by far the better resume its not even close. pep fought and beat all of the top fighters in his weight class of his era. Pernell Whitaker did not fight both the # 1 and # 2 lightweights of the 1980s, so he did not fully prove himself. Not to mention whitaker's much thinner resume doesnt match pep in quality or quantity. Who did whitaker beat that was as good as a prime sandy saddler?

Who were the no.1 and no.2 lightweights of the 1980's? Can't wait for the answer, and can't wait to tell you that Whitaker beat the guys who beat them :good

[sweet_scientist]

pep had something whitaker did not.....offense. pep knew how to put fluid combinations together, and he knew how to always be active. Whitaker loved to clown and run, and though at times he showed flashes of sharp one punch counters(especially the left uppercut)......whitaker was never active or aggresive enough, all he showed he could do was make people miss punches without throwing any leather in return... willie also had better ring generalship than whitaker and was the smarter fighter and better footwork. Pep knew all the tricks in the book, and his duck unders/ spin his opponent manuevers were just plain genius.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

:lol:

[Sweet Pea]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

:lol::lol: Hey Suze, you might wanna start keeping that stuff to yourself.

[SuzieQ49]

Who were the no.1 and no.2 lightweights of the 1980's? Can't wait for the answer, and can't wait to tell you that Whitaker beat the guys who beat them


Hector Camacho and Edwin Rosario. Going 1-1 with a past his prime ramirez is not a good counterpoint, even if he was robbed.


[Only registered and activated users can see links]


Honestly dude im not that impressed. Pep shows far more flashes off offense and aggresion in his fights than whitaker did. In some of whitakers biggest fights, it appeared to me he was running a track meet, he simply clowned around too much. I dont think whitaker had that overwhelming comman prescene in the ring like willie pep, he did not control the entire fight in ways pep did. Pep was brilliant.


ps dont try to tell me azumah nelson was close to his peak because he was not.

[Robbi]

pep had something whitaker did not.....offense. pep knew how to put fluid combinations together, and he knew how to always be active. Whitaker loved to clown and run, and though at times he showed flashes of sharp one punch counters(especially the left uppercut)......whitaker was never active or aggresive enough, all he showed he could do was make people miss punches without throwing any leather in return... willie also had better ring generalship than whitaker and was the smarter fighter and better footwork. Pep knew all the tricks in the book, and his duck unders/ spin his opponent manuevers were just plain genius.

Have you seen Whitaker fight? I doubt it with such an opinion.

Whitaker put on the 'mother' of all domintating performances against Ramirez in their rematch. I doubt if Pep done a similar type of job on a journeyman, never mind a world class opponent.

[Sweet Pea]

ps dont try to tell me azumah nelson was close to his peak because he was not.That's odd, considering he had some of the best wins of his career AFTER Whitaker.

[Bill Butcher]

Easy guys.

Both Pep & Pea were boxers supreme, masters of their on era.

Nobody did it like Pep & then nobody did it like Whitaker since Pep.

My personal opinion is that Willie was the better defensively & probably offensively too.
Benny Leonard was the original.... Willie Pep took it up a notch yrs later..... then Pernell took it to Benny`s level yrs later but not quite to Pep`s level IMO.
3 master boxers that owned their era but didnt have real KO power like some of the other greats, thats why they were so good, they had to be slick & they were.

[JohnThomas1]

Hector Camacho and Edwin Rosario. Going 1-1 with a past his prime ramirez is not a good counterpoint, even if he was robbed.


:blood

That's a weird thing to say right there. You can't do much more than totally school someone. One of the worst decisions in history should not be held against someone, crikey Suze.

[sweet_scientist]

Hector Camacho and Edwin Rosario. Going 1-1 with a past his prime ramirez is not a good counterpoint, even if he was robbed.

Hector Camacho was a lightweight for all of the first year of Pea's professional career, so you're going to hold it against him that he never fought him? By the time Whitaker was prime, Camacho wasn't even worth fighting. He was losing to guys like Haugen. Heck even as early as 1986 he was losing to Edwin Rosario.

Now as for Rosario, Whitaker could have foguht him, but instead he chose to fight the guys who beat him, like Ramirez and Nazario. Why would he fight him in say 1988 instead of Ramirez? Ramirez had beaten him already and performed much better against Chavez than did Rosario.


Honestly dude im not that impressed. Pep shows far more flashes off offense and aggresion in his fights than whitaker did. In some of whitakers biggest fights, it appeared to me he was running a track meet, he simply clowned around too much. I dont think whitaker had that overwhelming comman prescene in the ring like willie pep, he did not control the entire fight in ways pep did. Pep was brilliant.

LMFAO, I bet you haven't even seen an entire Pep fight. :patsch

Oh, and in some of Pep's biggest fight, he outright quit, so don't try and tell me about how Whitaker didn't command fights and was running a track meet.

In his prime Whitaker commanded everyone, with ease.


ps dont try to tell me azumah nelson was close to his peak because he was not.

He was closer to his peak than what Whitaker was when most saw him defeat DLH :good

[sweet_scientist]

Easy guys.

Both Pep & Pea were boxers supreme, masters of their on era.

Nobody did it like Pep & then nobody did it like Whitaker since Pep.

My personal opinion is that Willie was the better defensively & probably offensively too.
Benny Leonard was the original.... Willie Pep took it up a notch yrs later..... then Pernell took it to Benny`s level yrs later but not quite to Pep`s level IMO.
3 master boxers that owned their era but didnt have real KO power like some of the other greats, thats why they were so good, they had to be slick & they were.

Benny Leonard actually had quite a bit of pop. He scored some impressive knockouts.

IMO, Benny is above both Whitaker and Pep when it comes to career accomplishments.

[JohnThomas1]

Now as for Rosario, Whitaker could have foguht him, but instead he chose to fight the guys who beat him, like Ramirez and Nazario.

Whitaker and Rosario were actually slated to fight at one time, might have even been signed. I never did read what actually stopped the bout going ahead. Pretty sure the circumstance was with Pernell as the title holder and Rosario beltless. I seem to recall it being around Loy time. Maybe they were looking past Nazario, but i think it might have been a fraction earlier and am guessing he chose shot at Anthony Jones. Just a stab in the dark tho.

[JohnThomas1]

Benny Leonard actually had quite a bit of pop. He scored some impressive knockouts.

IMO, Benny is above both Whitaker and Pep when it comes to career accomplishments.

Did you know Ray Arcel rated Benny the greatest fighter he ever saw? Made BIG mention of his incredible feinting ability among other things saying it had boxers doing things they didn't want to do and put them exactly where Benny wanted them. The impression his comments left me with was that Leonard had them going like puppets.

[sweet_scientist]

Did you know Ray Arcel rated Benny the greatest fighter he ever saw? Made BIG mention of his incredible feinting ability among other things saying it had boxers doing things they didn't want to do and put them exactly where Benny wanted them. The impression his comments left me with was that Leonard had them going like puppets.

That's huge praise, but he may well be justified in giving it. Leonard beat the best lightweights during a great lightweight era over and over again. His consistency was quite remarkable considering.

Even looking at him on film a little past his prime against Lew Tendler, you can see great feinting, the footwork of a master fencer, and the balance of a cat.

[sweet_scientist]

Whitaker and Rosario were actually slated to fight at one time, might have even been signed. I never did read what actually stopped the bout going ahead. Pretty sure the circumstance was with Pernell as the title holder and Rosario beltless. I seem to recall it being around Loy time. Maybe they were looking past Nazario, but i think it might have been a fraction earlier and am guessing he chose shot at Anthony Jones. Just a stab in the dark tho.

Pity it didn't happen. Pity their primes didn't really coincide either. Would have been interesting around 1988-89 but even more interesting around 1986-7.