Prime v Prime: Guglielmo Papaleo v Pernell Whitaker

Tough call, thoughts?

 

Why not just call him Willie Pep lol

 

Because that's not his name. Any thoughts on the matchup?

 

You're a tool, there's my thoughts.

 

You're pretty cool. Ever step in the ring chief? You might want to do a little research before calling someone a tool.

 

I'd say that the biggest tool imaginable is someone who posts another man's magazine cover for their avatar when he's never stepped foot in the ring himself. Classic. Anyway does anyone have any thoughts on this matchup?

 

Uh oh. You're opening up a can of worms here mate. Taking on Classic single-handed usually doesn't end well.

 

LOL. Wouldn't be the first time brother. I'm ready and willing, I'm just on here trying to enjoy an awesome boxing resource and I get dismissed by this guy. Not gonna happen. I don't care if I'm booted out of this forum never to return again...

 

Explain. And if you do so I'll give you my thoughts on this cliche' but impractical fantasy matchup.

 

Who are you for me to pander to? Contribute or don't, just be respectful and I'll reciprocate.

 

Alright, here's my contribution: 1) The Search function is your friend. 2) Take a gander at the fighting weights of the combatants you're pitting against each other. 3) Refrain from making inane statements.

:good

 

Uh pardon me comrade but, although Pernell Whitaker ended his career as a welterweight he started as a Lightweight and while, yes, Papaleo was better know as a Featherweight, he fought quite frequently as a Lightweight. Why don't you do your research before pretending to be superior because you have x number of posts when you're talking to someone who's been in the eye of the storm and back many times over. Dismissed.

 

Put the lid back on, double fast.

 

Sweet Pea has boxed. But anyway, that doesn't even matter one bit when it comes to posting opinions. Most people on here have boxed, especially on the classic forum, this happens to be where people are so fanatical on the sport that they've delved into boxing history with freakishly obsessive measures. Most of us here have boxed. I'm not jumping to Sweet Pea's rescue here i just don't think it's good to dismiss say someone like Felaman or Manassa (if they haven't boxed, i don't know if they have), and they're maybe the two best posters.

Anyway i'm wanting to contribute to the thread. In a matchup Pep has a style that potentially works, just moving and throwing leather plenty. But the times that he is standing off and not throwing mean that Whitaker who is a master chess player, can do masterful work of his own. Whitaker in reality on the strength of well, his strength, he's naturally larger. Sorry for the kop out.

 

Whitaker was a Lightweight?! And all this time I thought he was just that slippery little character I'd seen in the Youtube highlights against De La Hoya. The avatar, screen name, and signature are merely coincidence.

Also, pardon me for assuming the past prime exploits of a Featherweight weighing in over the limit in non-title bouts don't hold much credence in a head to head matchup with one of the greats of said higher weight class. I was only aware of 3 top flight LW's Pep fought in his prime (Angott, Joyce, and Stolz), whom he went 2-1 against in 10 rounders. I didn't think that was really substantial enough to qualify him in a matchup here. Obviously I haven't done my research, you said so yourself. Fill me in on why Pep should be favored over a fighter who matches him in skill and outmatches him in size.

While you're at it, go ahead and give me your breakdown on how Whitaker takes a "wide Decision" over Hearns at Welterweight. We all know Hearns wasn't on the level of a Buddy McGirt, but I'd be interested in hearing your analysis. Thanks in advance.