Attribute Test (Mayweather vs. Whitaker)

The question is which defense is better, not more complex. Versatility is not inherent in effectiveness. Neither is complexity, whatever that means.

You're painting a picture that indicates Floyd always shoots off meaningful counters, and that Whitaker just gets by wiggling his upper body around, and that's simply not true, especially when Whitaker is the superior combination puncher and is just as creative with his leads and counters. If you like Floyd's pull-counters better, that's all well and good, but that by itself doesn't make Floyd more skilled, just stylistically distinct. Offense is a complex thing. But again, there's no evidence that Floyd has demonstrated far better offensive or defensive attributes. Whitaker has controlled and outscored and out-maneuvered more challenging offensive fighters, one in particular being Chavez.

Whitaker is the better combination puncher, the better ring general, has the superior upper body movement. Floyd's pull-counters and check-hooks are impressive but it doesn't make him better simply because you like them.

 

Whitaker could win the fight, but it would not be with his jab alone. It isn't heavy enough to consistently force Floyd backwards.

This is extremely difficult to call when you put all nostalgia aside. Pea would have to lead a lot more than he was accustomed to. Floyd would have to work behind his own jab to the body and work his way in. He could beat Whitaker in the trenches, but I don't think he can on the outside. He had more than enough trouble with Zab.

Floyd wasn't prime at the 147 with Judah, though. He'd noticeably slowed down from his days at 130-135. And he sure as hell wasn't prime at 154 with a powerful, iron-chinned opponent outweighing him by 20 lbs in DLH.

It's only when fighters retire that we remember them at their absolute best, for some reason. Pea, great as he was, wasn't in god mode for every one of his fights.

 

I don't give a **** about popular votes. Those historians give dues to fighters in their era.

I am confident in my posts. If I care about the popular vote i would be a broke gambler bc the odds are designed to punish the "popular" vote.

I am one of the best handicappers on this site. I can a knack in seeing true talent, not hype which is why i caught the live dogs and small favorites.

If i have a bias opinion i will lose money.

 

This content is protected

 

Looks like Pea's getting tagged here...

 

Pete and Duran are the guys who could beat Floyd h2h w/o any significant size advantage

 

Another idiot who believe there is a such thing as an in prime ATG. I mean that ****er Oscar was already an "PRIME ATG" when Whitaker fought him. I mean chavez Sr was "IN PRIME" when he fought Whitaker.

Common sense. use it.

 

Get your eyes checked. And explain to me how he blocked those punches with his hands at his waist?

 

This has dropped off a cliff.

 

I guess i "hate" floyd because i said pernell is more talented. Its not a diss. Floyd is one of the smartest fighters ever but guys you gotta realize this era is just not as good as it was on talent. The talent is not what it was

 

Get your eyes checked. And explain to me how he blocked those punches with his hands at his waist?


Like i have said before about Pea's defense. He dodges and he doesn't fight back half the time. If you miss with Floyd, he is going to make you pay more often than not.

 

This is actually quite difficult. I'll try and settle on as many categories as possible:

Jab: Whitaker
Cross: Mayweather
Hook: Mayweather
Body Punching: Whitaker
Speed (Foot): Whitaker
Speed (hand): Mayweather
Ring Generalship: Undecided
Strength: Undecided
Chin: Whitaker
Countering: Mayweather
Combinations: Whitaker
Defence: Too close to call. I've seen Whitaker get hit more, but he also exposed himself to more danger by throwing more punches and engaging more. He also proved his defence against better opposition. Mayweather's defence is, of course, brilliant. Very difficult to hit him with a flush shot.

Mayweather has the less risky, more economical style. Everything is quite calculated and simple, and he does it so well that no one can deal with it. Whitaker has more of a spontaneous, flowing style, and he's more unpredictable.