Barney Ross or Pernell Whitaker Who Was The Greater Fighter?

I tend to agree, which is why I usually always have Ross a bit higher. Both are unquestionably top 20, Ross a bit nearer the top 10.

 

I personally favour Whiatker. Who was never beaten in his prime and was only beat when he was doing drugs and was in his late 30's.

 

I think you put too much emphasis on things like that while leaving out factors like quality of opposition and the frequency with which they fought. Not that Whitaker didn't have an excellent resume, but it wasn't up to par with Ross's. Had Whitaker fought in that era it's likely he'd have racked up a loss or two here and there as well. Even in that era Ross was very consistent.

 

look its just my opinion but I just don't see Ross giving Whitaker much trouble the man was a genius in the ring , a brilliant technician and ring genrel a master of ring craft ,

nothing against Ross great fighter in his own right but I really do rate Whitaker as one of the greatest.

 

You could say the same about Ross.

 

To be honest you judge to much soley on just wins.

 

Really? Ross wasnt as much as a genius as Whitaker, lets be honest.

 

How so? I've seen few better. It's not like he was a huge puncher or a brawler or anything. He just outboxed everyone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrzbaeX4Z-E
Watch from about 2:45 onwards.

 

maybe by his achievements and stats but by watching him on film certainly not on the same level as Whitaker in my opinion.

 

No, you're just a stubborn mule who refuses to acknowledge the point at hand. You're in danger of being branded a simpleton if you continue in this way.

How do you come to this conclusion? I'd like to know. I put emphasis on proof. I rate the most proven fighters the highest. Ross proved his class and adaptability in a very deep era against the best fighters through 3 weight divisions, hardly faltering along the way. McLarnin had a few more hiccups, but only because he was consistently fighting even better opposition than Ross or any of them. You have to take these things into account when judging a fighter's consistency and overall merits as well. You seem to only look at part of the picture.

 

Seen that fight before. And Ross does look great but he dosent look as great as this man............FACT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_G5v_PNsl4Q

 

And people say Sweet Pea is underrated?

 

I rate Whiatker better than Ross due to him never being beat in his prime, being more consistet, and looking better on footage.

Ross is a incredible fighter but not as good Whitaker.

 

How are you going to compare a highlight package of a fighter's greatest moments to a singular fight against an elite fighter?

 

atschI'll go ahead and give it to you: Simpleton. But whatever floats your boat. I'll go ahead and end this convo right here.