Better P4P: Willie Pep or Pernell Whitaker?

[GOD-FR33]

F-a-g...............

You're an F-A-G.

[ShoulderRoll]

You're an F-A-G.

Come on, man. This is the History Forum not Non Stop Boxing.

If you want to debate do it like an adult.

[IronDanHamza]

Come on, man. This is the History Forum not Non Stop Boxing.

If you want to debate do it like an adult.

The guy doesn't even write with paragraphs, man. You learn that at about age 7.

He can't even grasp the reply quote function.

Special kind of guy.

[SlySlickSmooth]

How much of a real fight is a fight against a 'bum' or low level journeymen? Not much (if you are a really talented fighter), they were and still are essentially exhibitions, they are in a sense 'fixed' fights. Those fights do give a young fighter valuable experience but only in getting used to preparing for a fights, used to travelling, fighting in front of crowds etc, they don't really improve the fighters skills.

A guy like Rod Salka is slightly different, he is more a domestic level fighter. He has the capacity to give a world class fighter a proper fight should the world class fighter not be fully fit and motivated. There were a number of Rod Salka's in Willie Pep's record but even so those fights still shouldn't count for much. I personally think credit should be given to the fights against the 'world level' fighters, they are the fights that give you the evidence for how great a fighter was/is, not these stay busy fights to earn extra cash.

The big issue with crediting fighters with lengthy records is we truly can't critique the fights. We don't have the story, history, pictures, nevertheless fight footage. Men with losses could still of been revered as tough tough men. I get what you're saying how its still a 'fixed' fight, really hard to grade these past greats on film we don't have. We don't know much at all of these "world" level fighters unless you dig deep and research.

[Scott9945]

Am I the only one who doesn't rate Chavez particularly high at 140? Still a good fighter, but I have always felt he had lost a notch - both physically and technically - and regressed compared to his 130/135 days.

Chavez has to be among the top 140 lb champions, but there is no doubt that he was a better fighter in the 130's. Since he was pretty much a crappy welterweight it seems apparent that he doesn't add weight as gracefully as McLarnin or Pacquiao did.

[LacedUp]

Am I the only one who doesn't rate Chavez particularly high at 140? Still a good fighter, but I have always felt he had lost a notch - both physically and technically - and regressed compared to his 130/135 days.

He didn't face the same quality of fighters below 140 as he did at 140 and still is arguably a top 3 140 pounder of all times. He also spent the best part of his championship years at 140 and looked good, so I would say that's clearly his best division and most people would remember him for the work he did there I'd say.

[McGoorty]

Who is the better fighter P4P between the two? Both are known for being defensive wizards.

This is easy as hell and that is not to denigrate Pernell who was brilliant but no one compares to Willie Pep in speed and boxing skills and genius. I have never seen anyone, ever as good as Pep and I would not protest if Pep was voted best P4P fighter of all time despite not being a huge puncher. The earliest film of pep shows a bloke with hands so fast and accurate as to defy logic and anybody's defense, did he ever miss ? Pep missing the target was rarer than purple gold. His record was off the planet, just check his record after 200 bouts, leaves everyone else eating Pep dust.

[GOD-FR33]

Really?

"This is easy as hell "

Is it, really? We don't even have enough footage on Pep to make that claim. What speed and genius are you talking about? Footage please? Don't worry, I'll wait.

[young_robbed]

It certainly isn't "easy as hell". I think you can make a great argument for Whitaker being better.

[The Old LefHook]

I believe it is a photo finish, difficult to see the winner clearly.