is Pernel Whitaker Overrated?

Chavez matches up well with Pryor. With his great chin and how open and off-balance Pryor gets in throwing punches, I think Chavez would bust him up, especially over the second half of a fight.

Can't see Napoles being a league above those fighters myself. I'd say all 4 are roughly in the same league.

You can call CHavez limited against elite boxers, but how many elite boxers have the others faced to find out if they are limited?

I didn't see Pryor or Napoles presented with a Whitaker type boxer in their careers.

Napoles had losses to guys at 135/140, you act as if all he had to do was rock up and he'd demolish the field.

He got beaten by lesser fighters than Julio Cesar Chavez so I don't know why you'd think they are different leagues.

 

Chavez and Nelson are closer to what Whitaker can expect from Pryor than anyone Pryor has faced with regards to Pernell though.

If anyone is stretching belief in their opinion, it's you imo.

 

The Laporte fight was close, but who actually scored it for him?

As for Randall, yeah, Chavez bailed out of that one, but Chavez's career was pretty much done the night Pernell embarrassed him. He was never the same again.

He went through his prime pretty error free though, unlike your boy Jose. :good

 

Cervantes was way past it.

 

Cervantes was NOT the man. After losing to Benitez he was gifted the WBA title back while Muangsurin, Kim and then Mamby did the better work.

The Richard Steele thing elicits a 'yawn' and thoughts of 'spastic'.

 

Chavez simply stopped dedicating himself to the sport. I can understand why, he had a long prime, achieved a lot, and then let himself go. He didn't get beaten at his best, unlike Napoles - on multiple occasions.

Chavez has some padding in his record, but so does Napoles. Not all his wins were against good fighters.

 

Monzon had a pretty sound prime. Some early losses, but nothing once he hits his prime.

Whitaker, whose resume is slightly inferior has no losses in his prime so I'd be inclined to have him just ahead.

Chavez, whose resume is slightly inferior has no losses in his prime either. I'd say he's thereabout with Napoles.

Jones' resume is a bit below Whitaker & Chavez, but he also has no real loss in his prime. Montell Griffin basically played dead to crawl out of the beating that was awaiting him. I'd say he's up there or on par with Napoles.

Floyd Mayweather has already lost to Castillo and DLH held his own against him imo, plus his resume is a tad below Jones', so I wouldn't say he's up there with Napoles despite his greater consistency.

Other guys would be in Napoles league or higher because they either have better resumes than him, or resume's on par, with only a few losses to better calibre fighters than the ones Napoles lost to (e.g. Duran, Ortiz, Ali, Hagler, Leonard etc.)

 

Earlier on: Sweet was a Floyd 'hater'.

Now he loves Floyds undefeated record.

ushvinder is confused.

 

I fear the words "Ricardo Lopez" are about to be used. Suits his straw-man style. :good

 

Yeah, he was no longer the man in the division. A decent strap holder level perhaps, but not the Cervantes of 73-5 at all.