Pernell Whitaker vs Willie Pep

Whitaker via decision. Pep did weigh-in around the lightweight limit even when in his prime during the 40's. Whitaker would be marginally bigger physically as he was a natural lightweight, but not much bigger.

A very fascinating match-up. Nobody gets a boxing lesson in this one. Both are way too skilled offensively and defensively. I think Whitaker showed more variety in terms of defensive moves. He could move swiftly on his toes behind the jab, feint, and score while on the move just like Pep. Whitaker was the most effective boxer in history at scoring punches going backwards.

Not too sure two fighters combined in one fight have as much boxing ability and defensive skills as these two.

 

Its very hard to say. I think everyone would agree, this would not be a barnburner. Pep was very smooth technically, brilliant upperbody movement, and was perfect at scoring within range, then moving away swiftly. There would be times when both would be forced into being the aggressor while the other boxed. Exchanges would be few and far between, as both would not feel comfortable being the aggressor for lengthy periods of time. I just feel Whitaker has a better arsenal of weapons, and was more complete. His inside ability was pretty much as good as his long range skills.

If Whitaker shared a ring with Saddler more than once, he would "own" him every single time.

 

I really disagree with your view of how the match would pan out.

Pep was a smooth fighter, but a fighter with balls - He slugged it out with Saddler on the inside for large portions of the fight. He wasn't an "in and out of range" type fighter in the Mayweather mould, not from the footage I've seen. He was one tough son of a *****, and I don't think he gets enough credit for this.

Whitaker too was very slick, but was more than comfortable in his opponents range. And as tough as they come.

I could see both fighters seeing this as their opportunity to turn aggressor (both light punchers), and I think Pep may have been the slightly better puncher (if weaker), certainly the more fluid footwork, although I give Whitaker the edge for upper body defensive artistry - But don't forget how quick Pep was. And his footwork meant he was constantly punching from angles. It'd be the toughest defensive effort of Whitakers life.

I'm going to go with Pep by UD - Perhaps in one of those instances where Whitaker and his followers can't believe the decision went against him. A controversial call

 

Pep was an "in and out" type of fighter from the footage I have seen. Obviously their were moments when he slugged with his opponents, but he was mainly a swift mover who liked to score and keep on the move. It would also be the toughest defensive effort of Pep's life as well. Its a tough fight to call, mainly because both just so hard to hit often, and cleanly. I like Whitaker's variety better than Pep's. More complete.

 

I'd say Whitaker by UD.:good

 

Whitaker is the better fighter in my opinion too. We just have to deal with the fact that willie pep will get more praise within the boxing media, all you have to do is look at sweet pea on film and anyone with a clear mind can tell you he is superior.

 

These two are the most skilled boxers ever.

Pea UD.

 

most skilled defensively arguably, certainly not the most skilled all-round.

 

Whitaker is on par with any fighter in boxing history for skill and all round boxing ability. Pep, Robinson, Ali, Leonard, etc.

Pretty much one of the best boxers ever to lace'em up. Even though he wasn't born in 1920's with over 100 fights on his record.

 

Thier style would definetly bother whitaker and i never said he would beat leonard head to head. Camacho lost to pressure fighters when he was old and washed up, he would pose problem to whitaker due to the fact that hes faster and he has a more complete offensive package, it would be a 7-5 type decision for sure.

 

I'm not really objecting to your choice of who would win the match, just the nature of it, you made it sound like Mayweather Vs Cory Spinks would look.

I think Pep is more of a "side to side and all around" type fighter than "in and out" anyway.

I don't know how significant Whitakers size advantage would be to be honest, he was never a 135lbs powerhouse, never relied on strength/power to win fights, as opposed to finesse, and I think Pep was too tough to be stopped by him - So unless there's a lot of clinching, I don't see the size differential being too crucial.

 

Whitaker would not stop Pep. He never had the power to KO Pep with a single blow, and he certainly wouldn't connect enough to wear him down for a late stoppage. Pep's superb movement and slick defensive style would see him through until the end.

I also agree it would not be a physical fight, but don't rule out some clinching. Whitaker's just a more complete fighter, and his jab was better. Once Whitaker got into the groove behind the jab he was a very finely tuned boxing machine. Not just laterally and on the offensive coming forward, but also going backwards in a straight line.

I watched some footage of Pep on Youtube earlier, and I think Whitaker is technically more sound than Pep. One thing I do like about Whitaker compared to Pep, co-ordination.

 

The only this you can say about these two fighters is they didn't punch hard. Skill wise they are 2 of the top 5 ever to grace the sport.