Who Had The Better Resume - Manny Pacquiao or Pernell Whitaker?

I am inclined to pick Manny P4P and Sweet Pea H2H. I think Manny just has such a huge range to his career. But the difficulties he had with Morales, Mayweather and Marquez make me think Mayweather may sneak a win provided he is super cautious and avoid a KO.

Pacquiao we have a career over 8 weights and wins over Márquez, Morales, Barrera, Hatton, De La Hoya, Cotto, Mosley, Margarito let alone wins over decent fighters like Broner and Bradley. We have to set against those his loses to both Márquez (plus very controversial draw and close victories) and Morales, his disappointing effort vs Mayweather and loss to Jeff Horn and Bradley (albeit controversial and past his best).

Whitaker we have Olympic Gold, with a career over 4 weights, with wins over Roger Mayweather, Ramirez, Haugen, Nelson, Paez, McGirt x 2 , Vasquez and of course his "draw" with Chavez. Plus wins over very solid fighters like Layne, Pendleton, Brazier, Rivera. Then close losing fight with De La Hoya and brave effort vs Trinidad (I mean remember what a monster Tito was!) when past his best.

Whitaker only really has Chavez and Nelson as wins (yes I said it, wins!) against ATGs and for name recognition is simply not on the same level as a resume. However worth keeping in mind Pernell simply didn't have a super star crowd pleasing fighting style so this should be taken into account. Not many stars were desperate to fight him, bit of a no-win situation as with McCallum IMO. I think his losing efforts against Tito and Golden Boy actually increase his reputation rather than diminish it, if he had won either he would have jumped many rungs up the P4P list and he is already pretty highly rated.

It can be argued how many of Manny's wins were against prime versions of these fighters but there is such a variety of styles that he had to figure out over so many weight classes his record is still astounding.

 

Thanks very much!

 

I should add that I think Whitaker was just before the era where every super star has to always have super fights. When he was champ it was still about fighting whoever was top rated in your division and proving yourself through being the man while working towards maybe a single legacy defining fight. Now if there is a sniff of you being a crowd pleaser you have to have fought 5 ATGs before you are 25 (provided they are over the hill) and jumped 5 weight classes, not a dig at Mayweather or Pacman lol! But seriously it was a slightly different era.

I have said before on another thread that Mayweather's genius was making a non crowd pleasing style into a big attraction. Pernell must be spinning in his grave how much cash Money made from a similar "boring" defence based style.

 

Excellent post. Pac is my #19 pfp and Whitakker my #22. Pernell was greater at LW than Manny was in any single division, Manny's weight climbing was more stupendous. You can flip a coin for me and I'd have no less confidence in the result than how I order them.

 

I see it different ... In Chavez and Nelson, Whitaker has the wins ( Chavez robbery) over the two best fighters either defeated .. he also beat a terrific Mayweather, twice dominated Ramirez ( another insane robbery) , destroyed Haugen and outclassed McGirt .. even in his late career losses he was super competitive against a prime De La Hoya and Tito Trinidad .. I love Paq but he struggled every time vs Marquez, lost to Morales, lost to Mayweather in a non competitive manner , etc.. without question a great, great fighter but Whitaker may have been the best fighter of the second half of the 20th Century .. he was right up there ... Floyd's brilliance was that he was not any more exciting but such a more talented self promoter ..

 

Great post and you're so right regarding Mayweather's ability to promote himself. If Whitaker had played up the "bad guy" role, in conjunction with his slick, show boating style, he would've sold a lot more tickets I'll bet. Heck, even without the bad guy aspect, lots of people paid to see him anyway, in the hope of seeing him lose because some hate show boating.

 

Some have already to eluded to it but this is a classic example of one fighter with a superior resume and another fighter with superior skills in a H2H.

I firmly believe Pernell would defeat Pacquiao in clear and handy fashion at any weight they met at...

And I give Manny's body of work a clear edge over Whitaker's resume in overall quality of opposition, longevity, and box office success.

Someone did point out that Pernell dominated LW better than Manny did at any particular weight, and that's probably true, but I still give the edge to the guy that blew threw 7 weight classes (I don't count his sham 154 title) and violently manhandled their best men.

I think the fight itself would be a classic matchup of style, and I would favor Whitaker to defeat Pac by wide decision

 

Pacman.

 

I respect your opinion and it's certainly worthy of interesting debate.

 

Great post but I will remind you that Chavez held Whitaker to a draw, which is no shame even given Chavez fighting far over optimal weight and near 100 fights under his belt.

 

Thanks very much, but with all due respect it was a "draw" only in name. I had Whitaker winning by at least 4 rounds I think and Julio was totally neutralised. It reminded me a lot of Pacquiao vs Mayweather, you kept waiting for Julio and Manny to start a surge and it never happened. I am not suggesting Julio embarrassed himself, I agree there is no shame in being schooled by the number 1 P4P fighter at the time, but the only people who thought it was a draw were Mickey Vann, Franz Marti and Chavez's mother (who thought her son did very well, shame that nasty Americano kept punching you in the face).

I also think it was telling there was no rematch. If it was a genuine draw why not go round again? Because nobody fancied seeing Julio chasing shadows for another 12 painful rounds.

 

Plus Whitaker lost twice to Rivera. Those two "wins" were make-up wins for the robberies against Chavez and Ramirez.