Was Pernell Whitaker really that good?

What does any of that have to do with how good Pernell Whitaker is?

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5tXsaTX4RA[/ame]


I don't think Roger Mayweather would be too keen on Whitaker, being in the ring, he made him look stupider than he sounds.



[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cnpUdvbGyQ[/ame]

 

At welterweight no doubt. Although I'd favour Pea, it could be fair to say whoever would be the most aggressive in the fight would lose

 

If Sweet Pea was about to fight Mayweather Jr. 10 times he'd win 7 of it.

 

I disagree. I guarantee you Whitaker would be more aggressive. He had no qualms about beating a fighter up if they didn't oblige his counter-punching game. He was a magnificent in-fighter.

Here he is at 140 against super-journeyman Harold Brazier:

[yt]-ynGnpGgwCw[/yt]

And the rematch with Buddy McGirt:

[yt]oZ4yaINTQKU[/yt]

Those are as fine displays of offense as you're likely to see from anyone.

 

Although Mayweather's mental state in the ring is untouchable today, Whitaker is one of the few fighters who would make Floyd frustrated for sure. Whitaker is the one more likely to not get overconfident and follow through to the end. Whitaker outboxed Chavez easily and was robbed. Mayweather got a gift and a comfortable win against Castillo who is similiar but a more inferior fighter than Chavez was.

 

Floyd beats Pea if you ask me, prime for prime. Both are maybe my 2 favorite fighters ever. Sweet Pea's style & southpaw stance is going to give anyone hell and he will clown anyone but if you pick one guy to matchup with him very well, its Mayweather. I thinK Mayweather gives him fits. Great fight that I would love to see though

 

As for a fight between the two, Whitaker's southpaw style, all time great southpaw jab, and offensive work-rate would see him to a decision win, with Mayweather doing better down the stretch than he did early on. Whitaker never needed to adapt (his style was all encompassing), whereas Mayweather does. That alone would see Pete sweep most of the early rounds.

One thing that would give Pete trouble is Mayweather's straight right. It's one of Floyd's best punches, he's used it to great effect against southpaws, and it's the one punch Whitaker showed vulnerabilities to. Wouldn't be enough to get the win, though.

 

And that was a young, relatively green Whitaker. It really is a hell of an action fight, though.

 

Fair. Clearly you know pea more than I do, so would you say floyd has a better shot at lightweight or super feather(I realise pea didn't fight at the weight) or does he do better the higher his weight is?

 

Floyd was at his best as a Super Feather, whereas Whitaker would be either too weight-drained or too green at the weight to have won. Any reasonable weight for both (135 to 147) would see Whitaker as the victor, in my opinion. As good as Floyd is, Whitaker was better. Especially in the key areas that would be prevalent in a stylistic match-up between the two.

 

If he sticks and moves, making Whitaker the come forward fighter, Mayweather would win. It all depends on his game plan for the fight.

 

Yes, he was that great. I am a Floyd fan but he doesn't compare to Whitaker.

 

Maybe, but I doubt it has that much effect on Whitaker. He did have a good chin, and was never stunned in the prime of his career like Mayweather has been. Even later in his career in losses, he fought some pretty good boxer punchers in a young DLH, and young Trinidad while being even smaller (5'6") than Mayweather and being much older than his opponent.

 

Mayweather showed the ability to "stick and move" convincingly in one fight, against Corrales at 130. Even the rematch with Castillo was a poor, timid performance.

People that act like Pete didn't have the ability to press a fight or dig deep to get the win are people that simply haven't seen enough of him. The guy could fight, not just box.