I feel it would be a little like Starling v Curry 2 which was close and Whitaker would probably beat Starling too, maybe more convincingly than Curry did.
So we’re putting a peak Curry at 23-24 years old against a 31 year old Whitaker that’s started on the downhill stretch of his career? I’ll go with Curry by clear UD.
Curry is a better welterweight than Whitaker. Over his best few years he was also extremely sharp and had a fantastic blend of speed and power in both hands. His sharpness is what would trouble Whitaker and i don't think it would be overly close.
I’m not sure Curry was a better Welter, though it’s certainly debatable. I do believe he’d have been a bad matchup for even the best Whitaker at the weight. However, I think Pete, before hitting his 30s, would fare better against certain styles and fighters than Curry would have. Namely the top pressure fighters and/or punchers.
Prime Trinidad couldn’t stop a shot Whitaker despite steadily battering him with power shots over the final 5 rounds of their fight in ‘99. Yet you pick Curry to stop a near prime version in 8 rounds? The same Curry that couldn’t come close to stopping or even flooring Marlon Starling over 27 rounds?
Marlon Starling was never stopped in his career so it's hardly a knock. Was he ever even dropped by a legal punch?
He did George. Showed he was a fing tough guy. Most of his career obviously didn't have to prove it cos he whitewashed em all.
Not sure off the top of the head. I wasn’t trying to knock Starling or even Curry, just giving some perspective. Whitaker was never stopped, either, apart from his last career fight where he suffered a broken clavicle. Crazy ******* still wanted to fight, but he couldn’t mask the pain when the ring doctor grabbed his shoulder. The fight was called then and there.
Just checked. He was officially ruled down in the first against Jose Baret. It’s on YouTube. Absolutely bogus call.