Pernell Whitaker was probably overrated

[Evil_Meat]

Due to size disparities and lack of noticeable wins on resume. Pernell was not a big welter and as we all know size matters. There's a reason why skilled fighters like Duran and Wildred got KO in their careers.

Garcia, Brook, and Porter over Sweet Pea? LOL

[Sheldon312]

lmfao you can't make this **** up. As soon as I clicked, I knew I was entering an A plus thread.

You can be more skilled but lose to a number of fighters. Perfect examples would be Hearns vs Barkley, Duran vs Hagler, and Frazier vs Ali 1

[Sheldon312]

Garcia, Brook, and Porter over Sweet Pea? LOL

Brook would be too big, Porter would be a stylistic nightmare, and Danny has a solid foundation strong enough to beat the smaller Pernell.

[Evil_Meat]

You can be more skilled but lose to a number of fighters. Perfect examples would be Hearns vs Barkley, Duran vs Hagler, and Frazier vs Ali 1

I'm ****ing dying laughing I can't man I'm done here. Thanks for laugh have a good day.

[Sheldon312]

I'm ****ing dying laughing I can't man I'm done here. Thanks for laugh have a good day.

So Hearns wasn't more skilled than Barkley, Duran wasn't more skilled than Hagler, and Ali wasn't more skilled than Frazier?

[Robbie Barrett]

Due to size disparities and lack of noticeable wins on resume. Pernell was not a big welter and as we all know size matters. There's a reason why skilled fighters like Duran and Wildred got KO in their careers.

Is any of the guys you mentioned as big as De La Hoya was and there's only maybe Crawford as skilled as De La Hoya too. Saying he couldn't beat the likes of Danny Garcia and Porter is ridiculous.

[Sheldon312]

Is any of the guys you mentioned as big as De La Hoya was and there's only maybe Crawford as skilled as De La Hoya too. Saying he couldn't beat the likes of Danny Garcia and Porter is ridiculous.

Ok, Danny may be a stretch but Porter is a nightmare. Great chin, relentless pressure, strong, and great at cutting off the ring. I don't think Pernell would be able to keep Shawn off him.

[billeau2]

Let's get one thing clear, Pernell is one of the top ten most skilled boxers of all time. The guy was great at fighting in the pocket, his hand was beautiful, his foot work was as smooth as a preacher's sheets, and his defense was second to none I'm. But, looking back at his resume, you will see that he has no real great names on his resume. He got outboxed by Oscar, he couldn't finish Chavez, and he list to Tito. Now, some may argue that he was out of his prime against Oscar and Tito but that is an Excuse. Pernell couldn't adjust to the speed, power, and skill of Oscar and he couldn't handle the constant pressure Tito was bringing to him. Yes, people say that he schooled Chavez but after rewatching the fight, it isn't as clear as many people make it out to be. There are those who say that Pernell is superior to Floyd but I just don't agree. I don't see a 30 to 34 year old Floyd losing to the Chavez, Tito, or Oscar that Pernell fought. Well, Oscar would probably be 50/50 or 60/40 favoring Oscar due to styles but he would've embarrassed Tito and Chavez with ease. For all the flack guys like Roy Jones and Floyd Mayweather get for not fighting top competition, one thing is for sure, they both have a better resume than Pernell. I could drop Floyd in any era and he would be a top 5 fighter in any Era. Hell, I think he would be undisputed at 140 and 147 if he was in his prime today, but nothing Pernell did in his career can convince me that he would beat the likes of Thurman, Porter, Mikey, Crawford, Danny, and Brook. Discuss?

Sheldon
Sometimes there is a major part of a fighter's past that can be reevaluated: "Did Monzon fight smaller guys, and did he fight a prime ATG on his road to greatness?" and... "If not is he as good as people claim he is technically?" Or, "We only have Tape of Charlie Burley fighting one man, and besides beating Moore, what is it about him that makes him so legendary?" Is it perhaps our imagination? Moore was great but lost to other fighters now and then.... Something like the above, you dig so far?

What one cannot do is suddenly cast aspersions on every fact known for a fighter...It does not work that way because there is no such thing as a perfect flawless victory, or non refutable fact about any fighter, or anything for that matter! So... "Ali beat Foreman the badest fighter," versus "Ali beat a dispirited, drained, outpsyched Foreman, easy pickings." "Jones beat Toney, totally outclassed him" versus "Toney was weak, undertrained, drained, and would have knocked Jones out otherwise."

When we pick a bone if correlations come then fine, but again, to suddenly cast aspersions on everything the fighter did, is illogical. With that said, Many people felt that because of his defensive skills Sweet Pea was not given the nod when he should have been. Certainly this is the case with Chavez...I don't care how many times you reevaluate this fight my friend! Whitaker frustrated Chavez and probably won that fight... Chavez could not touch him. Outclassing chavez as he did puts him at the list of a fighter who beat an ATG before twilight.

Sweet Pea was competitive with Oscar (if I remember some thought he won that fight) and if one looks at tape of Whitaker one can see him able to do things that are phenominal...much like Roy Jones.

[billeau2]

You say he's top 10 of all time but then say he wouldn't beat Porter, Garcia, Brook etc?

Great point! I didn't even address that part of his post because it struck me as absurd, but you are right!

[Robbie Barrett]

Ok, Danny may be a stretch but Porter is a nightmare. Great chin, relentless pressure, strong, and great at cutting off the ring. I don't think Pernell would be able to keep Shawn off him.

Is Porter a better pressure fighter than Chavez?