is Pernel Whitaker Overrated?

Pryor was shocking against southpaws :rofl atsch This guy is ****ing clueless.

Come at me about 70s-80s light Welters and get merced :bbb

 

i love ya and respect you but i have to disagree. pac surpasses jmm in achievements and resume, relatively clearly in my book.

i get your feeling about the wins, but i have pac winning the first two by a point (haven't watched the third) so he's ahead there to imo

 

Cherry picking resume?

atsch

If I were to descend to your level I'd start talking **** about how Napoles moved through 135-140 without facing Carlos Ortiz, Kenny Lane, Ismael Laguna, Nicolino Locche and Bruno Arcari - all fighters who were actually in Napoles' weight range during his time at 135/140.

But I realise that it's hard to meet everyone.

What's the best you can do with Whitaker? He should have faced Terry Norris after he was losing to Luis Santana and Meldrick Taylor when he was never in the same weight class as him?

If he's losing to Billy Backus after a 2 month break, let me just say I'd have some reservations about that.

You act like Napoles was unbeatable at 135/140, but his record suggests otherwise. Your mythologising his stay there, the highlight being an arguable decision against Eddie Perkins.

Pryor would be a hard fight for Pernell, he hasn't faced that relentless a swarmer, but Pryor has also never faced anyone with near the defense of Whitaker. It's alright to start throwing haymakers non-stop against non-moving targets, but its another thing to do it against an apparitionist.

 

That's a ridiculous argument. Every single fighter that ever lived would drop a clear fight if they had to run such a gauntlet. Saying Whitaker would is hardly a blight on him.

But don't pretend that that's the calibre of fighter that Jose Napoles was facing on a consistent level.

Napoles resume despite the amount of wins is only slightly better than Whitaker's overall.

He doesn't have an Ike Williams like resume to start excusing all his losses like you wish to do.

 

Yeah, we all started accounts to flame and troll that Pernell Whitaker is better than Pac.

Clearly we're the ones that are butthurt.

How about you do us a favour and disappear for 10 years and then come back and tell us all how Pac is regarded as a better fighter than Pernell.

Make sure you come with a quote by Teddy Atlas to support your case :good

 

Again, Pryor was poor against southpaws. Discuss.

 

Essentially you don't know what I'm referring to. Ho-hum.

 

He stepped up for his first real fights at 140 in 92. Sure he could have skipped the whole weight class and fought Meldrick but to call him a cherry picker for not doing that is the height of stupidity.

What he should have done is perhaps faced Chavez before jumping to welterweight and then forcing a fight with Chavez there. But even then, he was hardly facing a stiff in McGirt, who was regarded as one of the best in the world at that stage.

Meldrick Taylor before the Norris fight would have been an excellent scalp and added to Whitaker's legacy if he got the win, but Meldrick was already beginning to slip by that stage imo, as underwhelming performances against Garcia and Brown showed.

IMO Buddy McGirt was the better fighter post 91.

I heard his team avoided a Perkins rematch incidentally.

Yeah perhaps it wouldn't have been arguable then, but a perhaps is a perhaps.

Perhaps there wouldn't have been an argument if he ran into another Billy Backus.

Never heard Duran or Chavez say they were robbed. In any case sure, a lot of fighters lie and stretch the truth.

I admit I haven't read reports on the fight that shed much insight into it past Perkins and his interviewer talking about how bad a robbery it was.

He seems to highlight it amongst the many times he was reportedly robbed, so I'm guessing there might be more to it than the average fighter's bravado.

Who knows.

Which reports on it have you read by the way? Point me out to some. Would love to see descriptions of the bout beside the one liners where reporters describe the official verdict.

 

Nelson tried to bum rush him, Chavez stalked hard in the first half of their fight. None of them had great success.

Pryor is better at swarming than all those guys, but Whitaker is a bit harder to hit than Arguello and an aging Cervantes as well.

Your hamburger meat fantasy has no basis in reality but your desire to see Whitaker taken off his pedestal.

 

Nah, he wasn't mayweatheresque bad against them.

He easily destroyed past prime Kim.

He struggled with Kameda but it was more due Kameda's height, reach and awkwardness rather than Pryor's complete inabilty to deal with southpaws.


But, coming back to your question, yes, Rodriguez is unbearable to watch.

 

Did you see how off balance Kim made The Hawk? And he was just standing there offering nothing.