Let's switch Willie Pep and Sweet Pea

I think Pep would get battered by Arguello at LW. His was slippery on the inside and of course had great angles, but I think Arguello would be timing Pep late on in the fight and stop him late. Although I'm going by the Saddler-fight I have seen which I believe to be post-injury for Pep.

So I could be wrong. But I think Sanchez beats him. Can't see McGuigan posing him much problems to be honest :rofl I think Pep is on a different level entirely, be interested to hear what you have to say about that Pea.

 

If Willie Pep's defense was better than Pernell's, he wouldn't have been tko'd. Pernell fought all the heavy hitters like Pendleton, Trinidad, Chavez, Mcgirt, Pineda, and Oscar. None of these dudes even came close to knocking him out. Pernell is the ultimate slickster because he's knockout proof.

 

Well, if he`s not suggesting that... I sure as **** am.

We`re talking about Willie Pep here, the best pure boxer & defensive fighter of any era... Whitaker was great but Pep was his master.

 

I am actually surprised that Pernell took an easier road for the first 4 years of his career, I mean he had a very long amatuer career. I thought he would have pulled off a de la hoya or donald curry and start fighting contenders as soon as he turned pro.

If I were Pernell's manager, I would have built him up the same way that De La Hoya was built during his early career. I would have had Whitaker squash all of those featherweights and superfeatherweights from 1985-1988, and then fight greg Haugen in 1989. I will admit, Whitaker only fought like 2 or 3 legit opponents before the Greg Haugen fight.

 

Whitaker was Pep's grandad.

 

You think Whitaker was better than Pep ?

 

This content is protected

 

Whitaker had quite a few injuries early on in his pro career, breaking an ankle playing basketball I think, and also a couple of broken hands (even before breaking it again in his first title fight).

That said, he still was travelling ok all things considered. I think Roger Mayweather was a very hard task having only fought 11 or so times. Especially for someone that doesn't have punching power. A much more dangeorous fight than against someone like Jimmi Bredahl or a past prime Jorge Paez. Maybe about as difficult as a John John Molina, who Oscar was fighting around the same length of time into his pro career (but with more pro fights under his belt).

 

Yup. Based on the footage available of the two he clearly looks better IMO, though Pep was obviously a phenomenal talent even in the past prime footage of him. Whitaker is the more versatile fighter though, I think anyone comparing the two side by side can see this, at least with the footage available. It's very possible a prime Pep was on the same level, though.

 

The difference is that we have quality footage of every Whitaker fight while there is only some very choppy, low quality film of Pep in his prime.

I'm not one of those who says that Pep was "easily" better. There just isn't enough footage of him to prove this, but at the same time I do not count out the possibility of Pep being better than Pea at his very best.

I do think that his record is quite amazing, having studied it. Unfortunately we do not have all that much footage of his contemporaries either and thus they aren't rated very highly, fighters like Manuel Ortiz, Chalky Wright, Humberto Sierra, Eddie Compo, Sal Bartolo, Jackie Graves...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNhKyvrGp_4

There is a better quality version of this film but I've never seen it anywhere aside from the clips on the ESPN documentary about Pep.

Highlight:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvcwlV_1XUo

 

Whitaker's boxing skill and defensive ability combined can't be bettered. It's simply not possible.

If this man fought back in the 40's, well..................he'd be the best boxer ever to lace-em up in the eyes most. He's already one in IMO anyway.

 

Sweet Pea, would you say the same if there was say 10 min highlights of the Haugen fight and highlights of Trinidad and Hurtado fights and afew other of his last fights where the only ones available of Whitttaker

ans sya there was 40 fights of Pep i think we would say Pep is the better fighter going by film.

Its a grey area though as we can read reports and see he was amazing but we cant guage how amazing. JG has said he was better in every way but how much? Its a tough tough question no one can answer it properly. All we can do is prey the Pep vs Wright films turn up and afew others which i know were filmed turn up then we can have a better look of how good he was.

Just some stuff to think about?

 

he is one of the best no doubt.

His offensive and defensive skills are brilliant but saying that so are alot of other fighters and Pep i would include there from the footage i have seen and reports i have read.

I dont think if he fought in the 40s he would be higher regarded because in this thread we did all tend to agree he would be the best Lightweight but fall short at Welterweight so i think he would be wrongly underrated by most.

 

You can only call it as you see it. Going by all the footage available of both, Whitaker simply evolved Pep's style and enhanced on it. It's just tough luck if more footage was available of Whitaker.

 

its shite aint it?

Potentially one of the greatest boxers ever and some greedy ******* has stored up the tapes for himself or some dopey *******s have lost them all. ****s anyway.

I can see what your saying Whittaker has evolved peps style going by the films. But i do think Pep has the better movement and angle finding. Whittakers tight circle was great but i just edge Pep.

But Whittaker evolved other things in the pep style like inside fighting and offensive ability.