Chavez vs Sweet Pea. Who ranks higher all time?

Sweet Pea.

Whitaker - 18-21 sort of range.
Chavez - 27-30 sort of range.

 

Pea's adaptability over the long term has to be the deciding factor here.

 

Very disappointing results so far. But given the results of Louis v. Vitali, I guess I should have expected as much. As great as Whitaker was, he was not greater than Chavez. Chavez was 31 years old when he faced Whitaker, old for a lightweight of his style. It was his 88th fight and he had been through several wars. Whitaker was 29 years old and his defensive style should mean that he had greater longevity than Chavez and, indeed, went almost four years without losing. In my view he didn't really lose until 1999 when he lost to Trinidad. He was 36 years old! Chavez would be floored and lose a decision the year after he fought Whitaker. It was only a few months later, in fact. Chavez was very much past his prime when he faced Whitaker. Whitaker was in his prime. This explains the resuts. While Whitaker won the fight, there was not demonstrated the vast gap in ability necessary to believe Whitaker could have had his way with chavez whenever he wished. In my view, at lightweight or welterweight, prime for prime, Chavez would have whipped Whitaker. Chavez was greater both head to head and legacy terms. Undefeated for 14 years, 90 fights without defeat, an incredible number of championship fights, albeit mostly junior lightweight and junior welterweight (I wish he has stepped up to both lightweight and welterweight sooner in his career and stayed longer at each).

 

Ive been thru this numerous times - tho mainly with DINAMITA so I`ll let you off this time

They beat similar level fighters in their primes....
Chavez was more past his best when they fought....
Whitaker was a 4 weight champ to JCC`s 3 but he looked like **** vs Vasquez, never fought their again & if Julio never went after the best champion (Pea himself ironically) then its highly likely he would have beat any other WWT & became only the 4th man in history behind SRL, Duran & Hearns as the only men to win 4 titles, Pea would have to settle for being the 5th by the time he got to Vasquez.....
He was usually ranked p4p ahead of Pea prior to their fight aka their primes.....
Pea`s team didnt fancy a Chavez fight at 135 & with hindsight we now know that was both men at their best.....
87-0 is some achievement in any era of boxing, even Robinson`s day, that record gets discarded all too easily these days on ESB, its not the be all but its definite bonus points, remarkable consistency.

The clear cut win in their actual fight - despite when it happened - & Whitaker putting in better efforts when both were shells of themselves are the only reasons that I dont have Julio ahead without debate.

Cheers ! :good

 

Fair enough points, to be honest. I watched Taylor vs Chavez I last night. Incredible fight, I would have had Taylor winning by three points if Steele hadn't stopped the fight.

 

Me too.... but just as the Rosario fight showed peak, flawless Chavez (similar to how the Ali-Williams fight showed Ali`s magic at his best)... the Taylor fight showed iron willed, determined, all heart Chavez (similar to what the 3rd Ali-Frazier fight did for Ali)

Both those fights sealed the deal on any questions of Chavez greatness - he had about 20 more fights before facing Whitaker, something else to take on board maybe regarding the JCC-Pea comparison.

:good

 

Yes he does, and in fact it's probably better than Chavez's.

Whitaker has genuine greats like Nelson and (albeit unofficially) Chavez on his resume, in addition to McGirt (twice), Pineda, Paez, Nazario, Layne, Vasquez, and Hurtado, and also beat some of Chavez's more notable opponents like Ramirez, Haugen, and Mayweather. He beat fighters like Mayweather, Layne, and arguably Ramirez when they were all established experienced fighters and he himself was in just the early stages of his pro career.

 

Then what is there to show how he had faded?

 

Not really.

So why was Chavez favored to win then?

No, they both were in their primes during their lightweight reigns.

No, Whitaker being a better fighter to a begin with explains the results.

No, he isn't.

You just said you thought Whitaker was really undefeated until he was 36 years old, despite consistently fighting top guys and winning titles across 4 different weight classes. That's as impressive as any feat Chavez had.

 

My2Sense (or is it Me2YearsOld?), "No it's not." "No they weren't." "No he isn't." These are not counterarguments. They are the retorts of infants.

 

I don't have a problem with someone saying Whitaker is greater than Chavez (although I think it's very close). But Whitaker's win over Nelson is one of the most, if not the most, overrated win on this site. It's the only time Nelson fought at Lightweight. I gave Nelson absolutely zero chance of beating Whitaker at the time. Whitaker was bigger, younger, and faster. He should have dominated Nelson.

 

^ He did.

 

Whitaker was such a small stature fighter, that to me personally I don't hold it against him that both Chavez and Nelson moved up in weight to fight him, and I'm guessing that is why both Nelson and Chavez moved up in weight to fight him as well because they knew they wouldn't be facing a big lightweight or welterweight.

 

He SHOULD have dominated Nelson. Emphasis on should. I know he did. Point is, Whitaker has a great resume but I disagree with this fight being tossed up as some kind of signature win. The fact that Nelson never attempted to fight at the weight again (discounting the Nelson - Fenech III debacle) should tell you all you need to know about that win.