Pernell Whitaker was probably overrated

[champion4ever]

Sweet Pea used to control the tempo of every fight with his quick jab. He was master at staying off the ropes and keeping the action in the center of the ring. That's why he was a stylistic match up for anyone.

As far as the comparisons between himself and Floyd are concerned; While May was a lot easier to pressure and threw fewer punches than Pernell as he was accustomed to spending a great deal of his time on the ropes, relying largely on upper body movement; However Whitaker was the faster of the two with greater hand and foot speed.

One can never pin Sweet Pea on the ropes. He was too fast and quick for that.

[chrisJS]

Yikes. What an awful thread. I'll say this: If Whitaker's career was in this day and age there's a lot of fans that would never get over the Ramirez "loss", or the fact he only got a "draw" with Chavez and then use the "loss" against Oscar as proof he's not that good and the Tito beating would be the nail in the coffin. I'm convinced of that. It just seems there's dumber fans these days and too many boxrec jockeys.

In reality, he was unbeaten all the way up to the Tito fight. I was never a fan of his but he clearly beat Ramirez and Chavez and even the De La Hoya fight it was hard to give it to Oscar. He should have concentrated more on scoring points though instead of clowning a little too much but he still won IMO.

Whitaker at his prime was almost untouchable and I'd say of the last 50 years I'd only pick a handful of fighters to beat him from 135-147 and even then it would be close fights. His defense is the best I've seen and was so awkward. He's probably the best fighter post Sugar Ray Leonard.

As to what he'd do with Porter, Garcia, Thurman, Spence? He'd win very, very wide decisions over all.

[j.razor]

I had him clearly winning over JCC. He had the balls to take on prime Tito, Chavez and DLH--something Floyd would never have done. I do think Buddy McGirt beat him in their first fight though. McGirt is highly underrated as a boxer.

I think Whitaker's defense is much more impressive than Floyd's. Whitaker stood in front of fighters and made them miss, he has superior footwork. Floyd relied heavily on clinching and running, particularly in the second half of his career.

Stop hating on T.B.E. He beat all the fighters you picked against him & he would beat the ones in the past that you pick to beat him too. No one has or had a better defense than Floyd. T.B.E.

[Joe Beamish]

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

End of thread. Bingo.

[richardt]

I still cant believe how much Whitaker schooled Chavez and Ramirez in the first fight and was fleeced of a dominant win in both cases. Two of the worst robberies ever.

[j.razor]

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?

You have too many holes in your argument....

[Mindgames]

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?

Couple of things. Why did you expect him to finish Chavez, who was unbeaten at the time Pernell fought him and had the best chin in boxing? Never dropped in 80plus fights.As for Floyd handling Chavez and Tito with ease, he didn't handle a similar style but inferior fighter Castillo with ease. He didn't handle Oscar, who was past it with ease,but he'd handle a prime Trinidad with ease? The guy who smashed Reid, Vargas and Joppy? Now as for the last bit, where your talking about the current crop, your just being silly.

[kidbazooka]

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?

Whitaker isn’t overrated but I agree on the Chavez fight, ppl try to act like he completely destroyed Chavez but he didn’t yes sweet pea probably took it by a point or two but I think ppl were influenced by the fact that at the time Chavez was number 1 p4p and a monster on a legendary reign yet he couldn’t do much with Whitaker either but Chavez was already slipping at that point too

[Sweet Jones]

Look he had a draw with Chavez who some think he won now he didn't fight the best of Chavez who was a coked out alcoholic at the time but if Chavez is consider one of the all time greats than you have to add Whitaker to that list. What he accomplished as a Gold medalist and 4 world titles is no hype job

By all accounts, so was Sweet Pea at the time. And he still schooled JCC.

[Sweet Jones]

Azumah Nelson was a great fighter on his resume.

Chavez was a clear win.

Ramirez, Vasquez, McGirt, Mayweather, Pendleton, Haugen etc weren't great fighters but all very good, top level guys.

How the OP just glazed passed these names is incredible.