Who has the better resume Pernell Whitaker or Manny Pacquiao?

[Mr. Invincible]

No champ you are wrong. Morales was washed up when he beat Pacquiao and Pacquiao used excuses about gloves, shoes, blood tests as the reason he lost. Then Raheem outboxed a washed up Morales, then Pac fought a washed up Morales back to back then Morales lost to C Class David Diaz. Everyone knows Morales was washed up when he outboxed Pac.

So Pac lost because of the cut not because Morales was boxing his ears off? Every fighter who gets cut only loses because of the cut?

Its no agenda man at all, but to say that Pac beat a PRIME Morales is absurd man.

I stopped reading there. It's pointless I see. CHAMP.

[Mr. Invincible]

If Barrera and Morales weren't elite then who the hell is?

These people are obviously out of their ****in mind. Maybe they need to stay in the history section or something. Maybe that's where the fighters of yesteryear can remain the best ever like in a stationary dream sequence or something.

It is kind of funny how these guys are only like this when it comes to good to great American fighters of yesteryear. I just can't be a nationalistic pr*ck like that and ignore talent and accomplishment just because a fighter is not where I'm from. It's so simplistic and childish.

It's a ****in joke is what it is.

This thread really isn't a debate and the poll shows how ignorant people can be on this website.

[Mr. Invincible]

And what exactly determines who and why one fighter is smarter than another? Is it college education? If so don't you need to take the field of experience into question? For example, would Vitaly be smarter the Bonecrusher Smith in the field of business administration or John Duplessis in social work? Is it business success? Oscar DeLaHoya may not be as educated in books as many, but his business sense is obviously excellent. Another example would be Floyd Mayweather. Is there a smarter guy in boxing when putting together contracts and selling a fight? The guy can sell himself like nobodies business and get people to buy massive amounts of PPV's while getting the lions share of the gate, sales and merchandise. The point is that there is a lot more that needs to be considered than who's had the most education, its about how you apply it. And looking at it like that it can be argued there are others who are smarter.

I didn't read this but since it obviously will not let me PM you I will write it here. I don't read your responses and just wish you would ignore mine as well because I couldn't give a rats a55 about anything you say, have said or will ever say. Even If you respond to this I will ignore it. Every time I see blue writing I ignore it automatically and make it a point not to read it so **** off you internet loser.

[jtiger777]

I wrote it before and I'll write it again:

Morales wasn't SHlT above SBW. He didn't do well against any world class fighter except for Manny Pacquiao.

I believe that Morales would have had a great chance against Barrera and Pacquiao if they had faced him at SBW.

Hell ... Morales beat Junior Jones at SBW .. the man that embarrassed Barrera twice and had him considering retirement. Morales also has his one win over Barrera at SBW. After leaving SBW the only noteworthy win Morales has in his career comes over Pacquiao ... and we all know that Pacquiao was required to give a clean sample of blood without notice for that match. Manny came in looking weak and bewildered.

I have always found it amusing how certain fans hail Morales and Barrera as elite fighters. The only win they have over a world-class fighter between them is Morales' win over Pacquiao.

Stop the madness. Barrera and Morales gave us three great fights, but they weren't world class. Barrera could never beat anyone better than Morales and Morales bests days and wins were at SBW.

Fans on this site REALLY NEED to learn that no matter how exciting a fight is, its value as it pertains to legacy is in the rank and the condition of the fighters.

If you watch Morales' fights, you'll see that he lays it out on the line in EVERY fight, like most Mexicans. Same with Barrera.

However, take away Morales' win over Pacquiao and Barrera's win over Morales and you have two tough, blood and guts boxers who haven't accomplished a whole lot.

Yet fans on this site want these men to be seen as ELITE or ATG.

Based on what?

One win does not define a career for an ELITE or ATG.

By that way of thinking, anyone with an upset is an ATG.

That's stupid and irresponsible reasoning.

Let boxers do what they are supposed to: WIN

Judge them by the merits, not by the amount of blood they are willing to bleed in the ring.

Stop trying to make their wins against opponents not ranked #1, 2 or 3 into more than they were.

Boxing is about besting world champions and the best available top ranked foe in the ring.

Not every boxer follows this maxim, and therefore cannot be considered for greatness.

Now some of you more desperate posters wish to engage in games of semantics and have abandoned stating that certain fighters are ATGs .. and now instead choose to claim that they are "great fighters" .. so to seem as if the terms are interchangeable.

They are not.

Anyone can put on a great fight. This we should all know. Look at Mickey Ward. He isn't great at all but he sure gave us three great fights against Gatti!

Yet putting on a great show against a man who himself isn't great doesn't lead one to greatness. Without rank, there IS NO GLORY!

If it were any other way, there would be no need to call ANYONE champion because the 10th ranked fighter could simply have bloody slugfests with the 11th, 12th & 13th ranked fighters and could conceivably be seen as THE BEST FOR HIS EFFORTS, BUT NOT FOR WHAT HE HAS ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISHED ..WHICH WOULD BE NOTHING OF NOTE.

Which brings us back to Manny Pacquiao creating a so-called ATG legacy for himself at welterweight by fighting 5th ranked fighters!

SHlT .. 5th might as well be 10th in the scheme of things because it certainly IS NOT 1ST, 2ND OR 3RD!! I don't care how "close" an opponent is ranked to the top three spots: If he isn't in the top three, he's basically a tune up .. and tune ups CARRY ABSOLUTELY NO LEGACY VALUE WHATSOEVER!

The only argument available in Pacquiao's defense is that his resume is stronger for the names it carries. However those who make that argument ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to discuss the fact that those names were all ranked 5th or worse when Pacquiao became willing to fight them at WW with the exception of Cotto who was 4th.

You predicate your entire case on passed-prime names to hail Pacquiao as greater than a masterboxer like Whitaker?

That weak. Its pathetic, and it shows that certain people would rather live with comfortable lies than uncomfortable truths just to support a boxer that they've probably never met, and probably never will.
I believe that is the very definition of fanatic.

And I bet some of you will take that as a compliment.

thread........................

[Elotero]

All 3 have comparable resume's to Sweet pea. Morales barely beat Pac and he was at his absolute peak and nowhere near washed up. You can forget about that.

Barrera was at his peak as well and Pac blitzed and almost stopped absolute prime Marquez as well. He holds two other wins over him no matter how small a margin. A win is a win.

A 6-1-1 record against 3 other ATG's is a hell of a record. What is sweet pea's record against atg's?

On second thought, this isn't even worth debating.

This is not debatable. AT ****ING ALL.

Anyone who picked Whitaker must have an agenda and I don't have time for it.

LOL. Pac barely beats JMM and now suddenly a win is a win, LOL.

Pea didnt have any close call wins, brosef. He did get robbed a few times.

Pernell took on guys at the top, not guys on the slide. Thats all you need to know.

The Chavez fight alone is greater than the whole of Pacs career. How is this even debatable?

And people calling Azumah Nelson a bum? Barrera better than Azumah Nelson?
Not so at all.

I dont even need to blow up Pernell. His resume SHOULD speak volumes but even the Boxrec warriors cant spell it out.

[Mr. Invincible]

thread........................

8 world titles in 8 weight divisions.

That's the end of the thread there my man.

PERIOD.

[Mr. Invincible]

LOL. Pac barely beats JMM and now suddenly a win is a win, LOL.

Pea didnt have any close call wins, brosef. He did get robbed a few times.

Pernell took on guys at the top, not guys on the slide. Thats all you need to know.

The Chavez fight alone is greater than the whole of Pacs career. How is this even debatable?

And people calling Azumah Nelson a bum? Barrera better than Azumah Nelson?
Not so at all.

I dont even need to blow up Pernell. His resume SHOULD speak volumes but even the Boxrec warriors cant spell it out.

So a draw with Chavez is better than 8 championships in 8 weight classes with an all start lineup?

YOU=FAIL.

[The Big Dunn]

So a draw with Chavez is better than 8 championships in 8 weight classes with an all start lineup?

YOU=FAIL.

If you are someone that thinks Vitali beat Lennox Lewis, it makes perfect sense you'd pick Manny over Sweet Pea.

[IronDanHamza]

So a draw with Chavez is better than 8 championships in 8 weight classes with an all start lineup?

YOU=FAIL.

Yet, anyone with a brain cell knows it wasn't a draw and a clear Whitaker win?

Oh yeah, I forgot you just go off what Boxrec says

And Whitaker's win over Chavez is better than any single win Pacquaio has.

[Mr. Invincible]

I love how people on here want to give so much credit for the Pernell draw vs 87 fight, shop worn, 31 year old Chavez but refuse to give Manny credit for the wins over Morales. That's so pitiful I can't place words to it.