Larry says Mayweather beats Pernell Whiitaker and badly

[letsgobrady]

Mayweather had to get on his bike against Castillo in the second fight and against Jesus Chavez, because they would not allow him to stay in the pocket.

Mayweather beat J L Castillo decisively the second time, because he did not try to stay in the pocket the way he did in the first fight, because when he was in pocket Castillo was landing right hands on him etc. You watch the second fight all Floyd did was counter and move counter and move, because Castillo would not allow him to fight in the pocket.

Against Jesus Chavez he was confused as to whether to go on the outside or stay inside, because Chavez was throwing that many punches he was making it impossible for him to fight in the pocket. Floyd went on his bike again and only took control when Chavez started to tire.


You know this is the truth and this is why Whitaker is a better inside fighter.

after those fights floyd became a beast on the inside if chavez or castillo would have fought floyd again he would kill them on the inside.
how did pernells inside game do against chavez?not much

[-EX-]

The problem is that people don't.

Not so much in this thread (although there have been some cases already) but in the numerous previous threads about the same subject where Mayweather fans would not accept that Whitaker could come even close to beating Floyd.

Thankfully the Mayweather fandom has quietened down since his retirement but it was pretty bad a while back.

True. I'm a fan of both. But some of the Whitaker fans are guilty too. They don't wanna give Floyd any credit cuz they don't like his personality.

I jus feel Floyd's a more complete fighter BUT Pernell beat better opposition.

[IMDAZED]

after those fights floyd became a beast on the inside if chavez or castillo would have fought floyd again he would kill them on the inside.
how did pernells inside game do against chavez?not much

**Hits ignore**

[IMDAZED]

True. I'm a fan of both. But some of the Whitaker fans are guilty too. They don't wanna give Floyd any credit cuz they don't like his personality.

I jus feel Floyd's a more complete fighter BUT Pernell beat better opposition.

In boxing beating better opposition is what it's all about. And, for the most part, Pea did it while they were in their primes.

Floyd has more firepower for sure but Pea's style and defense was just ridiculous. To completely dismantle guys like Azumah Nelson the way he did...wow. Or to beat up on Rafael Pineda...when an ancient version of Pineda damn near beat Zab Judah only a few years ago (disputed split decision loss).

[Dynamite Kid]

True. I'm a fan of both. But some of the Whitaker fans are guilty too. They don't wanna give Floyd any credit cuz they don't like his personality.

I jus feel Floyd's a more complete fighter BUT Pernell beat better opposition.

I aint took nothing away from Floyd. I just think stylistically Whitaker is a nightmare for him. Im not saying one is a better fighter than the other or who has fought the better opposition etc etc.

[TheGreatA]

True. I'm a fan of both. But some of the Whitaker fans are guilty too. They don't wanna give Floyd any credit cuz they don't like his personality.

I jus feel Floyd's a more complete fighter BUT Pernell beat better opposition.

A lot of them probably aren't even Whitaker fans. I know very few actual Pernell Whitaker fans, his style just isn't something a lot of people appreciate(d).

There have been some fans of his in this thread but generally people pick Whitaker to beat Floyd because he is not Floyd.

[Kastrioti]

I got both of their career sets, I've seen the majority of Floyd's fights more than once. He was in my top few favourites when he was active. I like them both. I am just objectively analysing the matchup. Floyd has no chance. Am I hating on Floyd for saying that he wouldn't beat one of the best fighters I have ever seen? Seriously, go *** yourself.

Great, you say Floyd has no chance, just cause someone disagrees with you and your only comeback is, have you ever seen Sweet Pea fight, means ****. For all I know you could be lying through your teeth.


"seriously go *** yourself" Cry me a ****ing river.

[letsgobrady]

i think floyd is a better fighter in every aspect except maybe defense but i don't think pernells defense would be much of a problem for floyd especially since floyd doesn't just throw punches he throws percise punches so less punches coming your way less oppertunities to counter and use your incredible defense

[-EX-]

In boxing beating better opposition is what it's all about. And, for the most part, Pea did it while they were in their primes.

Floyd has more firepower for sure but Pea's style and defense was just ridiculous. To completely dismantle guys like Azumah Nelson the way he did...wow. Or to beat up on Rafael Pineda...when an ancient version of Pineda damn near beat Zab Judah only a few years ago (disputed split decision loss).

True...can't really argue with that. Floyd can't touch Pernell's competition.

[Dan...]

Great, you say Floyd has no chance, just cause someone disagrees with you and your only comeback is, have you ever seen Sweet Pea fight, means ****. For all I know you could be lying through your teeth.


"seriously go *** yourself" Cry me a ****ing river.

Sure I guess I could be lying, that would make me one sad *** though. I don't lie on here, there is no point. If someone asks me something I don't know or about a fighter I haven't seen enoguh of I just say I don't have a clue. This happens to be a debate I think I can speak on fairly well as they are two of my favourite guys and I have watched them a great deal.

I apologise in advance if I am incorrect, but I think you commented that Floyd's inside game was superior to Pernell's which is just crap. If you did say that and I answered with "have you ever seen Pea fight" then I stand by that.