Hi, I'm an avid boxing fan and trying to learn all I can about the sport, but by the time I was of age to stay up and watch the late night fights or buy The Ring, the dominant fighters of the day were RJJ, DLH, Trinidad, Barrera etc, so although I saw Sweet Pea getting spanked by Tito Trinidad when he was over-the-hill, I never saw him in his prime and don't really know much about him as a fighter. Was he a true great? I saw that he was rated #10 by The Ring in their Top 80 Fighters of the last 80 Years, so would like any opinions on the guy as he was obv an important boxer of this era. Pound-for-pound, was he as good as say, a Sugar Ray Leonard or a Roy Jones Jr, or was he slightly below that level, like a Hopkins or De La Hoya? Would he have beaten Floyd Mayweather at lightweight? And what was his best performance, and what was his most exciting fight??
Sweet Pea was DAMN GOOD! P4P, I'd probably rate him higher than all of the aforementioned. And yes, I believe he would have beaten Floyd (and perhaps even handily so). I always enjoyed his rematch with McGirt.
There is plenty of footage of him on Youtube in his prime Light weight days if you wish to view some of him at his best. Yes, there is not a poster on this site that would argue against him being a true great, he was one of the greatest to do it, and one of the most skilled. Yes, I am a big fan of his obviously, but you'll hear the same praise from more than just the likes of me. He was on the Leonard/Jones level, and above the Hopkins level. Above all but Leonard on accomplishments, which I'll lay out for you in a minute. Yes, he would most certainly have beaten Floyd at Lightweight based on styles, as he had all of Floyd's strengths, with certain advantages, such as being a southpaw, having a higher workrate, and having a better jab. Floyd often has to adapt to his opponents as well, which isn't the case with Whitaker. Floyd wouldn't win more than 3 or 4 rounds. I'd say his best performance was his fight against Nelson. He dominated a fellow ATG, and showed how skilled he was at dealing with pressure fighters, and he was one of the best ever, if not THE best, at fighting off the backfoot. He's had many boxing clinics though, the other fave of mine being his masterclass performance against Greg Haugen. If you want to see an exciting fight of his, watch his early-career fight with Roger Mayweather. Both fighters go down, but Pea outfights Mayweather and gives him a beating throughout. He won titles in 4 weights, unifying at LW, moving up to take the 140 crown from the big puncher Rafael Pineda, and then winning the WW crown and defending 7 times against the likes of McGirrt, Chavez, etc. One more move up to 154 against the oft-avoided Julio Cesar Vasquez(who'd dropped Winky Wright 5 times and was avoided by Terry Norris) to take his crown. Afterwards, as he came back down in weight, he started to slip, and aside from the Oscar fight, you'll see less of the Pea that once was. The Oscar fight is another many consider a Pea win, as he was known for getting robbed, such as in his first fight with Ramirez(one of the worst robberies ever) and in his fight with Chavez. Very stacked resume as well, he was one who wanted to fight them all, was interested in proving he was the best instead of preserving his record, unlike Mayweather. I rate him in the top 12-15 of all time.
He was brilliant defensevely, and had great offensive skills, schooled opponenets, he is fastly becoming widely regarded as the best ever lightweight in terms of h2h. Might be true, but Duran still my choice for that!! Sometimes watching Pernell give you the sense that you were just watching an absolute boxing master at work, the clever usage of angles at its very best imo
One of the greats in a deep division. Also wanted to point out that he was VERY strong, especially in the lower body. He didn't "run" at all like some people criticize him for. A guy like Pea was sometimes his own worst enemy, inside and outside the ring. People either loved him, or hated him with a passion.
Whitaker just happened to one of the finest fighters ever to grace the gloves. He was just as good as Robinson, Armstrong, Pep, and others. If Whitaker was around during the 30's and 40's he'd probably get the credit he deserves. He does get credit as a modern legend, but if he finished his career having 150-200 fights then he'd be a certain top 5 of all time.
Overall, there has not been a fighter as accomplished as Whitaker since he left the ring. There is a remark difference between R. Leonard and Roy Jones Jr as packages, but as ring talents, Whitaker stands side-by-side with them. He was the epitome of fighting off the back foot - the way he played matador to the dangerous Nelson and undefeated Chavez. In America, they look for aggressiveness, but such was Pernell's output that he fought with a kind of negative confidence, commanding ring centre with often comedically extreme lateral movement to further perplex his foe as he jabbed them as if he was going for a record. Whitaker was not a big puncher and his best work is split over two decades, so he never really helped wave boxings popularity flag by being its 'Golden Boy' or 'Sugar man', he just casually slipped and dipped his way through quality fighters, putting on exemplary performances - the rematch against Ramirez is the most one-sided decision ever on film. The time he truly did make big news, or got the kind of attention he deserved, was when the judges denied him of his right to take Chavez's '0'. He is one of the stone pillars of Lightweight, but in the higher weights beckoned bigger fights, so he continued past his physical prime up until he arguably beat Oscar while the latter was in his 'Glory years' - that can never be understated. He is a top 20 p4p fighter of all time for Ted Spoons liking.