Pernell Whitaker vs Ike Williams

EL BUjia,do you know what you are talking about ? Do you think i believe fighting 100 times or more means that this makes you a great fighter alone? You talk without a scintilla of knowledge of the past great lightweights I am discussing...You talk that only Pernell Whitaker had skills, and not Ike Williams, Beau Jack, Bob Montgomery, Kid Gavilan,yes, Ray Robinson, Freddie Dawson were somehow deficient in their unique boxing styles...Yes ONLY Perne4ll had skills and the great fighters above
were products of a mediocre era, that somehow produced fighters who
fought 25 fights a year,and did not have ALL around skills ala Whitaker.
What do you know of fred Apostoli.? He lost to Freddie Steele in their first bout, and later on He stopped Freddie steele who suffered a fractured breastbone, and the painful injury caused the great Freddie Steele to retire soon after...Besides Fred Apostoli never lived up to his great promise....
You talk foolishly when you imply that Pernell Whitaker had SKILLS and the other great lightweights had none, JUST LONGEVITY...Yes only Whitaker had skills !!!Now I get your drift....

 

When did he ever say this? You're the one that is making frankly laughable claims that the skill levels of the average contender in one era is necessarily unattainable by even a man who is possibly the #1 H2H Lightweight ever, purely because he's had fewer fights. That line of reasoning is just mystifying, really.

 

Did he[EL Bujia] not post above "skills be damned", implying plainly that
though Whitaker did only fight 46 times,he had skills to be damned but Ike Williams, Beau Jack etc were devoid of skills that only Whitaker had,only relying on their vast experience ! Maybe he phrased it clumsily, but the FACT still remains Williams ,Jack ,Gavilan, Dawson, had THEIR UNIQUE skills
as did Whitaker,with THREE times the amount of fights, in a much more COMPETITIVE AGE....If experience does not make a fighter better,well
why box to improve ?.

 

Burt, we all appreciate your stories and insight on certain fighters you've seen in the flesh, but you're clearly no analyst, and your biased and at times nonsensical logic is really showing through here. Also, maybe a course in reading comprehension? You've completely misunderstood all of my points in that post. And please don't presume to know another man's knowledge of fighters when you don't know that man at all.

 

Everyone is an analyst when they give a boxing opinion...Before i give an opinion I mull it over in my minds eye, as we all do...
And logic is not nonesensical if is correct...I regard the fact that I saw Williams, Beau Jack, Ray Robinson,Bob Montgomery,Kid Gavilan, Henry
Armstrong,fairly often as a plus, instead as a negative in evaluating a fighters place in history..Whitaker who I watched on TV was tops in his time, as Roberto Duran was in his times, no doubt...I just happen to think that if by chance we could match a prime Whitaker with a prime Ike Williams at his best, Ike Williams would by virtue of his experience and powerful punching , be the victor....Keep punching!!