Originally Posted by the cobra
Giving Whitaker the benefit of the doubt at the time and keeping him at #1 was just fine, but honestly, by that point, he wasn't the best fighter in boxing anymore. In retrospect, that seems pretty clear.
I think a similar thing is happening right now, btw. Floyd, like Pea, retains the top spot because of all the quality work he's put into his career and he'll likely keep it on most lists until he loses or at least looks real bad in a fight, but I personally don't see him as being genuinely the best fighter in boxing anymore. Not that he's far off or anything, but as they are now, I think Ward's better, and maybe Donaire, too. Those two have certainly been doing more impressive work recently.
It's probably part of the reason why a lot of P4P kings seem to fall so very far so quickly. There's a tendency to rate them as #1 when they really aren't #1 anymore.
Originally Posted by LittleRed
In those two years Whitaker went 5-0 beating McGirt, Cardona, Vasquez, Jacobs, and Rodriguez. Vasquez was a champion and three of the other four were top 10 guys with the rematch with McGirt being especially noteworthy.
During that same time period Roy Jones went 6-0. He was significantly more dominant than Whitaker who was dropped twice and held close by Vasquez. He beat: Garcia, Tate, Toney, Byrd, Paz, and Thornton. I'll concede that, on the average Whitaker fought the better guys. But Roy has, not just the best single victory but the more impressive ones. Thomas Tate had mover been stopped before (and would never be again) and that included taking everything Julian Jackson could throw at him over a 12 round pummeling. He didn't last 12 minutes with Jones. Thornton had given Toney a good work out; Jones demolished him. Byrd and Garcia were dismissed effortlessly and Paz was perhaps the most outmatched individual I've ever seen fight a champion. Those guys were no worse than Jacobs. I can see the argument for Whitaker. I just don't think that its strong.
There's definitely an argument, and that's in 20/20 hindsight. At the time? It's probably 100% justified. So which years do you unofficially give Whitaker considering he made Ramirez (twice), Haugen, Nelson and Nazario look amateur in becoming the undisputed lightweight champion (something that has not been done since)? Taking a strap off Pineda at 140, going up and beating the #1 Welter in the world (and Lineal Champ) in McGirt in a third weight class, all before proving himself superior to Chavez, whom you've both said he would've beaten even years prior to the actual fight? And with Julio being basically shot at that point, right?
I'll give you Jones, but where's the get-back? He's on par with either of them peak-for-peak and greater than both.
Bout to crash. Goodnight.