P4P Emile Griffith or Oscar Del La Hoya?.

I am not questioning who won.... I merely stated that those performances were not impressive. Your reply was simply no! I can't take your argument seriously... In the Paez fight Paez was able to slip and deflect quite a few of Pernell's punches. In the Nelson fight Whitaker was suprised that Azumah was able to compete at a weight higher than his natural weight.

I posted video for you to see the fights... and all you can tell me is what Lederman said great work:good

 

The fight was a close fight!

Post your scorecard...

 

:good:good Exactly many posters here have short term memories.

Yet the "supposedly know everything" about fighters that fought before they were even bornatsch

 

Hey anarci.

 

Yeah... how can these kids argue that they know Griffith real well when its obvious that they don't know Oscar. These so called You Newber Boxing Historians are funny!

 

Can I see some evidence where it says Whitaker was the number 1 p4p leading up to the DLH fight?

Or are you and Suzie merely saying that he beat a former number 1? I think you were making out that the former was true, so let's see some evidence to jog all our memories, or even to school us for something we know nothing about.

 

If Whitaker-Nelson was a close fight DLH vs. Miguel Angel Gonzalez could have gone either way :good

Oh, and my scorecard: 117-110 Whitaker
Nelson: 7 and 12 ( 10-8 ).
Whitaker: 1,2,3,4,5,6,8,9,10 and 11.

 

At the time it was debated on Whittaker-Jones around the time of changing the guard, but one thing is for sure after Oscar beat sweet Pea he was widely regarded no#1 Pfp by Ring,Ko and many others.

 

It was debated, meaning some publications had Whitaker no.1, some had Jones no. 1?

A single source that had Whitaker no.1 p4p leading into the DLH fight will suffice as proof for me.

I'll wait :good

 

Azumah NElson is one of my favs and I agree with TheGreatA that Whitaker beat him very clearly, schooled him at times. Nelson was above his best weight and it seems he missed something there. Still a great win.

 

Yes but you ca still remain objective, it like me saying 'Pacquaio would beat any version of Oscar the same as he beat that version', its clearly not true, neither is the 'clear decision' claim, given boxing fans are completely divided on the decision

And you really want to match Oscar with Benn at 160 Hell Benn could have made 154 in his younger years and would snap Hoya in half at either of those weights

 

Good counter points but the difference would be so small i personally wouldn't be putting too much stock in Whitaker being the smaller man. That's just my thoughts mate.

 

I always thought Oscar looked bigger in the ring against Whitaker, bearing in mind Oscar is a career weight drainer it isnt suprising

 

I believe I explained my reasons for not finding it too impressive. On hindsight I question whether Whitaker was truly deserving of being a top pound for pound fighter at that stage in his career and I question whether De La Hoya proved that he was the better of the two in that fight.

I could be wrong but wasn't Ring Magazine rating De La Hoya and Roy Jones above Whitaker after Whitaker's dreadful performance against Hurtado?

1996:

1. Roy Jones Jr.
2. Oscar De La Hoya
3. Pernell Whitaker
4. Felix Trinidad
5. Ricardo Lopez
6. Junior Jones
7. Kostya Tszyu
8. Terry Norris
9. Evander Holyfield
10. Mark Johnson

 

You don't need to post highlights of the fights when I've seen them in full several times. You did not believe me when I said the fights were closer to 117-111 type decisions rather than fights that could have gone either way so I brought up Lederman who scored both fights wide.

Paez slipped a few of Whitaker's punches and was also hit with over 300 of them. Of course CompuBox is not the most reliable either, but what's clear is that Paez got hit a ton.

I was impressed by Whitaker against Nelson.