Comparing the resumes of Mayweather and Whitaker

Interesting when you format it like that. Still with Sweat Pea, with guys like Nelson, Chavez, and McGirt. But Floyd's resume, if/when he retires undefeated, will definately be seen as stronger in a few years time. EDIT: That is to say, stronger this how his resume is viewed NOW. Not neccessarily stronger than Sweet Pea's.

 

No comparision even on coke he was half as good as MW !!

 

Good Post.


Just remember, a lot of fighters are heavily criticized before they retire. Floyds had a great career people just want to discredit him because he flaunts at how great he has done.

 

:good

 

Nelson was probably his best, or at least one of his best, actual performances too.

 

To compare those 2 fighters you need to watch Mayweather - De La Hoya and Whitaker- De La Hoya. Everything will become apparent. And while watching it don't forget to consider that in the first case Pernell was old and was around 70% of what he could be if the fght took place earler, Oscar - young man at his best. Whereas in the Mayweather's fight , OScar was old man who had only one fight in the 20 months before the fight and FLoyd was younger.

In general the level of Pernell's opposition is way better than Floyd's and what is more important is that Pernell fought the fighters at their primes, most of them were seen as the potential threats for Whittaker. We don't get it today in Mayweather's case. I mean back then noone would ever say that Pernell is dodging some fighter, and he was considered by absolute most as number one in his weight devisions unlike Mayweather.

Pernell wasn't afraid to go toe-to-toe, with the real punchers that is the reason why he was sitting on his ass several times.

Why Mayweather is fighting Hatton not Cotto ?

Because any Hatton's fan will admit that Cotto has more chances against Mayweather than Hatton. I am not saying that Hatton is a bad fighter. Hell no. Its just that I don't understand when Floyd is complaining about Hatton fighting only over the hill fighters. Ok. **** it Floyd , fight Cotto then. But will he ? Nah He would rather retire once again for 2 month and wait untill Manny get's fatter and goes to fight him in welterweight.

And again I am not saying that Mayweather wouldn't beat Cotto , he could and most probably he would but that is too risky. Most probably people wont forget that as years past by. It will stick to Floyd. It is not the "undefeated" thing that makes you a great fighter.:deal

 

:good

 

Whitaker at this point is greater than PBF. Whitaker is underrated by most. There is a case, though perhaps not a major one, that Whitaker is the best fighter since 1980, including Leonard IMO.

 

Whitaker is greater than Mayweather and would have beaten him head to head

 

based on what criteria:smoke did whitaker win 5 titles in 5 weight classes while remianing undefeated or did he lose his two biggest fights in hoya nd trinidad:deal

if an old b-hop can beat young hoya nd trinidad how come the super immortal sweet pea couldn't do it while being younger.:deal you are full of **** talking about sweet pea being greater than floyd. floyd would not have lost to ramirez at any weight.

 

I'd give the edge to Whitaker because he has more title defenses, defeated more world champions, and gave a better account of himself against Julio Cesar Chavez in a draw than Mayweather did in a win against Jose Luis Castillo in their first fight.

Head to head, I think it's close as well, but I think Whitaker wins it at 135 and 140. 147 is a interesting and depending on how finishes out his career, I might favor him.

 

Pernell Whitaker had a better career, he beat better fighters. Plan and simple, and even when he lost or got a draw many thought he won. Whitaker was also a better fighter, both defensively and offensively. His defense was more slick.