He certainly has the best wins on his resume, however he wasn't as active as Duran, didn't fight aslong as Duran, I'd also argue he wasn't as good a fighter as Duran, do I'd therefore have Duran at one. That list I made wasn't just based on resume it was based on how good of a fighter I feel they are too.
I always wonder that whenever I watch that video. I mean I know Pea wasn't considered a hard hitter and I believe Hurtado was up on the cards but he was done by the third shot.
Top 20 generally. Depending on my mood I have him as high as top 15. His problem is like PBF - top 10 skills but resume does not reflect it. I think if there was no controversy with his "Chavez win" you can make an argument for 10-15. It shouldn't really but the reality is there was a controversy.
Pernell Whitaker is probably the best boxer since Ray Leonard. He was a boxing virtuoso that won every fight of his career decisively thru 4 weight divisions until he was 33 yrs old vs a prime DLH & that could have easily went to Whitaker on my (& a lot of other) card.
Mayweather would give him a good fight & test Pea`s immense boxing skills to the fullest but I think Pea takes a close one on points. Pacquiao would have some moments but doesnt have the skill level to match Pea & would drop too many rds to be in with a shout on the cards but he`d always be there making Pea work hard all 12 rds. No other fighter from 135-147 has a prayer of winning more than 3 rds & would be out of their league IMHO.
1. Harry Greb 2. Henry Armstrong 3. Ray Robinson 4. Bob Fitzsimmons 5. Sam Langford 6. Ezzard Charles 7. Roberto Duran 8. Packey McFarland 9. Joe Gans 10. Benny Leonard 11. Muhammad Ali 12. Willie Pep 13. Barney Ross 14. George Dixon 15. Charley Burley 16. Archie Moore 17. Joe Walcott (the Barbados Demon) 18. Mickey Walker 19. Tony Canzoneri 20. Jimmy McLarnin 21. Ray Leonard 22. Pernell Whitaker
No, the REALITY is that Whitaker was the first man to beat Chavez & 3 fat corrupt, blind ****s dont get to take that away from him because they get to say what goes on `record`
He was one of the greatest ever, and his style was really exciting to watch...he made his opponents look slow and foolish...i'd rather watch him fight in his prime than just about any currently active boxer
No - you missed my point. It is not all about the results, to a good extent it is about the controversy. No matter how you saw the fight (I had a clear UD for Pea just FYI) the point is that there was a controversy. That is the reality. I did not say he did not win the fight. I said there was a controversy.