Who's the better defensive fighter Floyd Mayweather Jr. or Pernell Whitaker?

[IronDanHamza]

I guess ask yourself if Whitaker would absorb 75% of Maidana's punches for the first 6 rounds they fought

[IMG]http://media.*****.com/media/Azh0CgljvgE4o/*****.gif[/IMG]

Ok now ask yourself would Floyd get hit as much as Whitaker did against Hurtado, Rivera or Buddy McGirt?

[!! Shawn]

Whitaker fought every 4 to 6 months not once a year. Whitaker didn't juice like Floyd. Whitakers downfall was crack ******* not eating punches. Whitaker fought. Young Delahoya which many thought he won Floyd fought a wash up Delahoya which some thought he lost but he barley sleeked by a wash up Delahoya

This also, drugs did in Pernell, not ring wear.

[Xi_]

Hopkins was 40 something and still at the top of his sport, how could anyone with a brain think that Roy Jones Jr was better than him in his prime?

the question was about being a better defensive fighter......hopkins IS a better defensive fighter than roy jones and it's not even close.

[Vasyl’s dad]

I honestly think it's floyd. Before it was a more even battle and Pernell might have the better wins but floyd has done it for longer and across more weight classes and he's come out with much less wear and tear and without being hurt as much.

The whole "done it longer" is so overblown. He went about a year and a half with no fight, then came back and fought once a year for the next four, and when he did fight twice in the same year, 2014, it was against the same guy. Then you factor in that many of his opponents were in their mid to late 30s. Lets not act like he was fighting the best guy out each time. Every opponent was carefully picked.

[Vasyl’s dad]

Ok now ask yourself would Floyd get hit as much as Whitaker did against Hurtado, Rivera or Buddy McGirt?

Floyd wouldn't fight them until they were past the age of 35.

[!! Shawn]

the question was about being a better defensive fighter......hopkins IS a better defensive fighter than roy jones and it's not even close.

But yet in his prime, you couldn't hit him. Funny thing isn't it? Only fighter in compubox history to fight a round in a championship fight without having a single punch landed on him.

Its apples and oranges, you have the Roy's and Pernell's that could do things all wrong if they wanted and you still couldn't lay a glove on them, and then you have the Nards, and Floyds that do things text book perfect.

Is one really better than the other? If you can't hit a guy you cant hit a guy.

[////]

Ok now ask yourself would Floyd get hit as much as Whitaker did against Hurtado, Rivera or Buddy McGirt?

ok....... yes

[IronDanHamza]

Floyd wouldn't fight them until they were past the age of 35.

It's funny because you might actually believe that.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Floyd...

Both great but pernell would let his ego get the best of him and would get sloppy and stand and trade sometimes... Floyd never gets sloppy, much more disciplined

[IronDanHamza]

ok....... yes

What do you base that on?

More so Riveria and Hurtado than McGirt.

Of course, it's unlikely that Mayweather would get hit much at all by Buddy McGirt, but McGirt was actually a top fighter at the time so for arguments sake lets focus on the guys that weren't.