Pernell Whitaker vs. Manny Pacquiao @ 135

[Doctor_Tenma]

Honestly I did. I still can't see how any ATG is reduced to a punchers chance. I personally think that is a bit much but if you feel that way, cool I can respect your opinion and we can agree to disagree.

FWIW I honestly give Floyd an excellent chance of beating sweat pea, and I'm sure others feel the same way as well. Most boxing fans, who are honest with themselves, will admit that Floyd and Manny will be a very competitve fight. So putting two and two together how does Manny only have a punchers chance against sweat pea and not Floyd? Also how those a fighter who is consider one of the best of this era/past decade and is widely regarded as a top 50 fighter....reduced to a punchers chance? I just don't see it and again if you feel this way, more power to you.

Just because they accomplished enough to be called an "ATG" does not mean that another ATG wouldn't easily beat them. I'd give Mayweather a really good chance at 135, but in the end I see Whitaker taking it. At 140-147 it can go either way.

[RubenSonny]

Honestly I did. I still can't see how any ATG is reduced to a punchers chance. I personally think that is a bit much but if you feel that way, cool I can respect your opinion and we can agree to disagree.

FWIW I honestly give Floyd an excellent chance of beating sweat pea, and I'm sure others feel the same way as well. Most boxing fans, who are honest with themselves, will admit that Floyd and Manny will be a very competitve fight. So putting two and two together how does Manny only have a punchers chance against sweat pea and not Floyd? Also how those a fighter who is consider one of the best of this era/past decade and is widely regarded as a top 50 fighter....reduced to a punchers chance? I just don't see it and again if you feel this way, more power to you.

Styles make fights.

[bojangles1987]

You can't say Pacquiao has no chance, fighters of his caliber always have a chance if they are at a comfortable weight, but Whitaker is all wrong for him. Completely wrong for him.

Whitaker by comfortable to lopsided decision.

[Khalid X]

Pacquiao would only have a punchers chance against hearns, if you think otherwise please break it down.

Sorry bro I stopped breaking down fantasy fights a long time ago (I got tired of all the whiney and complaining after I took time elaborate on how I saw fights play out).

Now I will say this though..... I see Tommy (at 147) knocking Manny the **** out, if that is what you really wanted to know. I also see him doing the same to Cotto, Shane and Floyd as well because Tommy was huge at that weight, never got outboxed, had a long accurate jab and along with a nasty right hand. This is too much for any guy who I feel who isn't a true WW.

[RubenSonny]

Sorry bro I stopped breaking down fantasy fights a long time ago (I got tired of all the whiney and complaining after I took time elaborate on how I saw fights play out).

Now I will say this though..... I see Tommy (at 147) knocking Manny the **** out, if that is what you really wanted to know. I also see him doing the same to Cotto, Shane and Floyd as well because Tommy was huge at that weight, never got outboxed, had a long accurate jab and along with a nasty right hand. This is too much for any guy who I feel who isn't a true WW.

Sounds to me like a crappy excuse. So you just admitted that Manny wouldnt have anything more than a punchers chance against Hearns and you say that it is ridiculous that someone would say that an atg would only have a punchers chance against another atg.

[infamous larryx]

whitaker by embarrasment

[IMDAZED]

Pernell Whitaker would make Manny very tentative.

[Khalid X]

Just because they accomplished enough to be called an "ATG" does not mean that another ATG wouldn't easily beat them. I'd give Mayweather a really good chance at 135, but in the end I see Whitaker taking it. At 140-147 it can go either way.

I agree with you on the bolded. Many ATG's have dominated other ATG's. With that said just because you have the ability dominate a guy doesn't mean that fighter has/had no chance against you. I say this because I have see fights in which one fighter dominated a guy so bad only for them to fight again and the other guy win.

Sorry but I to give you an example, lets take Guzman vs Funeka. If we are being real with ourselves them we can both agree that Funeka dominated him in the first fight. Did that mean Guzman had no chance of beating a guy like Funeka? Obviously not as we saw Guzman clearly win in the second fight.

Boxing history is full of situations like this in which one guy dominated another guy only to lose to the same fighter when they faced each other. This is the point I have been trying to make. Sweat Pea could dominated Manny like you said and if they fought in a series (like I menitoned earlier) Manny could end up UD'ing him in the very next fight. This is why I say it's inaccurate to say he has no chance because they are both talented enough to beat each other. Pea could dominate him and Manny could beat him? Why...because both are ATG's and great at what they do.

[IMDAZED]

Honestly I did. I still can't see how any ATG is reduced to a punchers chance. I personally think that is a bit much but if you feel that way, cool I can respect your opinion and we can agree to disagree.

FWIW I honestly give Floyd an excellent chance of beating sweat pea, and I'm sure others feel the same way as well. Most boxing fans, who are honest with themselves, will admit that Floyd and Manny will be a very competitve fight. So putting two and two together how does Manny only have a punchers chance against sweat pea and not Floyd? Also how those a fighter who is consider one of the best of this era/past decade and is widely regarded as a top 50 fighter....reduced to a punchers chance? I just don't see it and again if you feel this way, more power to you.

Umm, real simple. It's called Whitaker-Chavez. You should watch it sometime.

[RubenSonny]

I agree with you on the bolded. Many ATG's have dominated other ATG's. With that said just because you have the ability dominate a guy doesn't mean that fighter has/had no chance against you. I say this because I have see fights in which one fighter dominated a guy so bad only for them to fight again and the other guy win.

Sorry but I to give you an example, lets take Guzman vs Funeka. If we are being real with ourselves them we can both agree that Funeka dominated him in the first fight. Did that mean Guzman had no chance of beating a guy like Funeka? Obviously not as we saw Guzman clearly win in the second fight.

Boxing history is full of situations like this in which one guy dominated another guy only to lose to the same fighter when they faced each other. This is the point I have been trying to make. Sweat Pea could dominated Manny like you said and if they fought in a series (like I menitoned earlier) Manny could end up UD'ing him in the very next fight. This is why I say it's inaccurate to say he has no chance because they are both talented enough to beat each other. Pea could dominate him and Manny could beat him? Why...because both are ATG's and great at what they do.

Great example a lightweight losing to a welter, nice one copey.