is Pernel Whitaker Overrated?

I don't know who that is, but I think Saldivar could have dove some damage to Marcel.

 

Saldivar was a hypejob.

He was brutally knocked out by some unknown midget in 4 rounds.

Marcel schools him badly.

 

I think you're thinking of Eusebio Pedroza.

 

Yeah, he was a bonafide hypejob too.

ESPN level fighter.

Can you imagine what Ponce De Leon would do to him?:scaredas:

 

Yeah, his jab record is great on Boxrec. What were the numbers again?

 

Whitaker is not overrated. His win over Nelson is overrated. Nelson was never a Lightweight. I gave Nelson no chance when this fight happened.
I've heard the argument that the way Whitaker beat Nelson nullifies the size difference. But that doesn't fly. Weight always makes a difference.
Let's put the shoe on the other foot. Bump Whitaker up to 147 against an all time great: Napoles, Leonard, Rodriguez, Robinson, Hearns. How many of those fights would he win? Hell yeah, weight always makes a difference.
I don't rate his win over Nelson much. He doesn't need it.

 

This content is protected

 

Fantastic work who ever did that.

Give him a green skin and you're looking at the incredible hulk.

 

Yeah, it's great isn't it?

At least he did get to perform at some high profile or big venues such as Caesar's Palace, Madison Square Garden, Alamodome, etc. Reminds me of a Michael Katz column I had saved. At-The-Time insight is fascinating stuff:

Whitaker-McGirt is matchup of two of best fighters in world
March 02, 1993|By Michael Katz | NY Daily News

You don't like Pernell Whitaker, you don't deserve him. You don't like watching him duck and parry, you don't like boxing. I take no dissent on this. In the words of the late great sportwriter Barney Nagler, you are not entitled to an opinion if you are wrong.

I say the same about Buddy McGirt. You don't like watching a guy feint with his shoulders, never raising a hand, and move his opponent into range for a right hand, go watch Sparky Anderson change pitchers. You don't appreciate Buddy McGirt, you deserve the infield fly rule engraved on your tombstone.

Now here they are getting ready to fight each other, and it makes me sick that as of yesterday, a grand total of 6,205 seats have been sold for Madison Square Garden's Saturday night special, matching two of the absolute best fighters in the world. This is no Riddick Bowe-Michael Dokes blowout, where 16,329 suckers paid their way in. This is between two of boxing's four best practitoners, which is my opinion, and pound-for-pound that's the only one that counts in this column.

It doesn't happen that often. Two of the best -- pound-for-pound -- meeting in the ring.

I hate that expression, pound-for-pound. Sounds like my doctor admonishing me. What this mythical ratings game is all about is determining the best fighter, no matter what weight. It is an old game and there are no rules. Example: Does Julio Cesar Chavez still rate No. 1?

Not on my list. I mean, normally you would think a guy has to lose his title in the ring, but this is a mythical title and if I were to put Chavez and his 85-0 record No. 1, then I've got to confess my next three picks all would beat him:

In this order, Pernell Whitaker, Terry Norris, Buddy McGirt.

As a precaution, however, I independently solicited the opinions of two of boxing's most astute judges, one from each corner Saturday night. They have the same top five guys I have, though the orders are different.

Al Certo may sound like a lunatic, he may act like a lunatic, but McGirt's manager is still a hell of a good judge of horseflesh and pastrami (joint called Harold's Sandwich Shop in Rutherford has the best I've had west of the Hudson).

Out of respect, he put Chavez first, followed by his guy, James Toney ("youse guys don't realize how good he is"), Norris and Whitaker. He follows this with a couple of bantamweights, Orlando Canizales and Junior Jones, another up-and-coming Jones in Roy Jr., and then Bowe and Lennox Lewis.

Prof. George Benton, Whitaker's trainer, agrees on the top five. He, too, puts Chavez first "even though I think he's a quart low, but he's still there, and nobody's been able to beat him yet." He follows with Whitaker, Norris, McGirt and Toney.

He still gives a call to Mike McCallum, "a great fighter even if he ain't what he was," and then Lewis, whom he thinks is the best of the heavies, Bowe, Evander Holyfield, Azumah Nelson ("still a tough, tough, tough guy") and his own new heavyweight, Michael Moorer. That's 11, George. So what? My top 10 has 13 fighters.Not only that, I'm allowed to change my mind. It's not only my column, it's my habit...

 

Definitely.

Yeah, although he was usually the second attraction a lot of the time in those fights (vs. Chavez, McGirt I and DLH.)

Always liked Katz. The archetypal scribe.

And yeah it's a shame that the heavyweights were garnering so much fanfare when they were often a fraction as talented as the little guys during the time.

 

Future avatar material, I think. I don't know how you manage keep the same one.

And though the second attraction, the people who attended were forced to witness it if nothing else, so at least he got to be on that big stage. Posted column is also interesting - like the collection of sports publication covers on how he was regarded - because it was also claimed these guys are hyped up today simply for being Whitaker opponents. They were already that, and recognized before he even stepped into the ring with them. Chavez was still pretty much considered the #1 fighter on the planet at the time; Nelson - while not a LW - was in the top five mix and it isn't exactly similar to Floyd pulling Marquez up two divisions beating a top P4P fighter, these guys were the same size; McGirt was the best WW in the world and top five overall, not exactly similar to a 38-year old Mosley (which I and most everybody at the time DID see a legit fight, admittedly). Vasquez was top dog at 154 and held a tremendous size, strength, power advantage, etc.. It's a very impressive top end, on a pretty deep record overall.

 

Well played my friend

 

Funny you propose such fights... I actually believe whitaker could get some wins against those guys.. and even if he didn't... wouldn't be completly dominated and basically shut out like nelson was. He would be very competitive and live and the cards wouldn't be a huge margin. Plus IMO pea moving up to welterweight was a bigger jump for him than what Nelson did moving to Lightweight. Just look at them and their bodies... Nelson looked like the bigger guy in the fight.

 

Of course, it was a bigger jump. In cases such as Gomez or Nelson, they aren't full fledged weight-jumps in class. 4-5 lbs does matter... 12, 13, 15 is something much more drastic and duly noted.

 

I don't think you can favor Pea in any of the fights I mentioned although I agree he would give a better account of himself than Nelson did. But then again, Pea was a greater fighter, clearly IMO, than Nelson.
Disregarding some of these recent freakish jumps up in weight (Paq, Marquez), where there methods at adding weight have been questioned, the jumps in weight are at least as difficult for smaller guys. There is a reason in boxing and even wrestling where the weight classes are spread farther apart as you move up.
So pound for pound Pea is clearly the better fighter than Nelson. Nelson comes up 2 weights classes (from his original best weight although I will grant he was great at 130 also). He had no chance. I gave him no chance to win that fight. Nelson looked bigger than Pea? At what cost? Maybe reflexes? How is a bloated Nelson going to lay hands on the great Sweet Pea? Nelson fought the remainder of his career (with 2 exceptions) at 130 for a reason. He didn't belong at 135.