is Pernel Whitaker Overrated?

i thought of you and chuckled when i saw the new cover the ring

who knows, broner may surprise us all...

 

Quintero and Ponce are still too fresh in the mind for me to be brainwashed

 

They have about the same thickness in their legs. Pernell had great, big trunks for thighs that carried a lot of weight, no doubt. But Napoles had very muscled arms, which makes me question whether he was truly even close to 135 when he was supposedly a lightweight. He's also taller and wider. Not the same size.

 

:tong:tong

 

Pea's wins:
I can't give Whitaker much credit for the Jorge Paez win as Paez had no business at lightweight, he was a fully fledged featherweight.
He beat a 'past his prime' but still a 'great' version of Chavez. (Yes it was a victory not a draw).
He beat the great Ramirez who was around 31 years old and has already been in over 100 fights and clearly was better before. This is still a 'very good' win.
Buddy McGirt - he's not a great fighter. Let's not overrate the dude.
He beat an ATG Azumah Nelson who moved up in weight.
The Vasquez win is at LEAST a 'VERY good win'.

Pernell is an ATG and one of the very best defensive fighters of all time...

 

There's been a few posts in this thread calling the Nelson fight competitive. **** is that about?

 

Roberto Duran = ESB's Golden Child.

 

Yeah now that I think about it, he may be the most reviled ATG as far as the General Forum goes. There's even been a couple more making some detractions here as well.. It used to just be MAG "Leonard didn't fight his fight fight right,right" 1965 and Need A Poo .

 

I've tried to uproot those who view Duran as a **** fighter, usually saying stuff like he had no defense, quitter heart, etc..

People actually agree with me!

 

...

 

Nah Napoles was a small WW, weighed 136 as a 28yo I think, same size as Whitaker pretty much

 

He proved he could hang and sometimes embarrass great fighters. It wasn't just who he beat, but the manner in which he beat them that makes him get the respect he does.

He also easily dealt with pretty much every contender/ strap holder he ever faced in his prime, and beat guys of varied styles.

When he was past his best days he still gave DLH all he could handle and against Trinidad showed that he could withstand a drubbing too.

He may not have faced the quantity of challenges that a lot of other greats face, but he passed through the challenges presented before him rather blemishlessly, and it's not just a modern trend to do so.

No other modern fighter with the exception of perhaps Roy Jones has made it look so easy. And I think Whitaker has a few edges on him as far as resume and durability which may see him even edge ahead of Roy, although it's arguable.

Mayweather has yet to face a great who is near their best and has had some challenges in beating the guys before him regardless. Of course, he's a great fighter but I wouldn't put him as high as Whitaker or Roy.

Pac has accomplished a hell of a lot but again, he has had some struggles along the way which mark him down.