ROY JONES JR or PERNELL WHITAKER

In rating a fighter all-time P4P, I consider their performances against the truly elite of their era, their overall resume, their overall skill at their best, and how they fared when past their best (in other words, how-or if- they proved their greatness by overcoming adversity). In all of these catagories, I give Pernell the edge. RJJ was magnificent to watch because his speed and power made him flashy and exciting, but Pernell's effectiveness was superior. I pick very, very few fighters (if any) over prime Pea at 135lbs, arguably the deepest division in boxing history. Where as I pick Foster, Spinks, Charles, and Moore over RJJ at 175lbs.

Also, I rate Chavez as the 2nd greatest since the fab four (part of the reason Pernell is rated higher than Jones on my list).

As for the Whitaker-Duran fantasy fight, I'll just say that I have never really tried to predict what would happen if both fought at their peaks at 135lbs, but simply because I rate him higher P4P, I'll give the edge to Duran. It's not a good reason as to why, but I can see either man winning this fight more so than any other fight I could think of. I guess my reason is Duran's versatility, his completeness in his prime that made him probably the closest thing to a perfect fighter that I have ever seen. Pea's slicker than anybody Duran ever fought, and overall a lot better than anyone he ever beat excluding Leonard. But it's going to be difficult for Pea, even with all of his unreal skill and talent, to beat someone as nearly flawless as a prime Duran. So, with that said, I pick Duran, but if anyone beats him at 135lbs, it's Whitaker, without question.

 

Whitaker

 

Again, "I neither say nor imply that Duran would hit a prime Whitaker as often as Tito hit a shot Whitaker..."

 

...I think that you are complicating this, not I. Again, an aged Whitaker's taking punches from a robotic Tito has nothing to do a prime Whitaker's taking or not taking shots from a far more actively punching Duran. You're effectively talking about 4 different fighters!

Old Whitaker is not prime Whitaker.
Tito is not Duran.

...the comparison fails.

Simple!

I don't believe for a moment that you took accumulation into consideration. If you had, you would have seen that the Tito-Duran comparison doesn't work!

And you know that most knock-outs do not happen due to one shot, but to an accumulation of shots. So an aged Pea taking single, stuttered shots from robotic Tito means he has a good chin. Prime Pea potentially being cornered and crowded by a 28 year old Duran provides a different test.

Do I think that Whitaker would be stopped? I'd say chances are that he would not be stopped by Duran. But I'm not as metaphysically certain as you are.

What happened to accumulation?

I think I've stated this before. It is two-fold:

1. The Tito-Duran comparison fails.

2. You should not be so sure that Duran wouldn't crowd and land on Whitaker enough to hurt him.

 

Too much is made of Viruet and Bizarro. Duran was never in any danger of losing any of those fights. They were fighting to survive and that is neither the way to win nor is a way that fighters chasing them are going to look good. We see this all the time. One guy throws nuisance shots and runs away, the other guy chases him and looks silly doing it... and frustrated.

And Whitaker fights to win, not to run.

I don't want to be redundant --but Whitaker's inability to keep Duran at bay with shots is going to be problem for him. Duran is more ferocious and relentless than anything Whitaker ever faced.

I do not think that Whitaker has that much more skill than DeJesus nor more speed than Leonard... he is complicated to be sure, but that won't matter as much as you think because Duran isn't going to be admiring his moves.

What's more, Whitaker is physically weaker than most fighters Duran has faced and he cannot hit nearly as hard as most either.

 

I consider Whitaker to have among the most complicated styles to solve in ring history! He'd be hell for Arguello for instance.

However, Duran isn't Arguello. He is not going to be standing back trying to intellectualize the Whitaker literature...he's not going to try to learn Greek. Duran is going to attack with strategic pell-mell and overload the system like a well-armed terrorist at the Pentagon.

 

Stonehands. Lets try and work out where your coming from, because I sure ain't got a clue exactly where it is.

Can I say first of all I posted 2-3 times regarding making a case for Whitaker lasting the distance with Duran. I made a valid comparison with the Trinidad fight when Whitaker was 'shot'. And it was all on Whitaker lasting the distance with Duran, not exactly a case for him winning the fight. Although Whitaker lasting the distance comes with the territory when it comes to my opinion of course as I think Whitaker would win on points.

Whitaker took Tito's shots. So what? That doesn't mean that Whitaker would stand up to Duran's shots because the fact is, Tito doesn't punch as quickly, as closely, or as often as prime Duran. Never mind the myriad other advantages Duran has offensively, defensively, and simultaneously.

Whitaker taking Trinidad's shots means a lot here. Why? Well if he could take Trinidad's punches, and he hits harder than Duran did at lightweight, then a prime Whitaker would physically and mentally better shape to take an opponents punches who doesn't even hit as hard. Simple logic. Makes even more sense when you said yourself that "I neither say nor imply that Duran would hit a prime Whitaker as often as Tito hit a shot Whitaker. You arrived at that conclusion on your own" So if your more or less agreeing with me, then why are we arguing. I replied to PACFAN on Whitaker lasting the distance and taking Duran's punches.

And you know that most knock-outs do not happen due to one shot, but to an accumulation of shots. So an aged Pea taking single, stuttered shots from robotic Tito means he has a good chin. Prime Pea potentially being cornered and crowded by a 28 year old Duran provides a different test.

Trinidad never landed one shot on Whitaker, at times yes. The fight was a 12 round war and Whitaker was hit with combinations. With the above your saying getting hit with single shots from Trinidad to potentially being cornered and crowded by Duran provides a different test, I assume you mean hit? Although earlier you said "Do I think that Whitaker would be stopped? I'd say chances are that he would not be stopped by Duran"


Whitaker in your words would not be hit as often against Duran as he did against Trinidad, and then you said the chances are that he would not be stopped by Duran.

I think your going crazy mate considering I made the case for Whitaker simply lasting the distance and not being stopped by Duran.

 

This is the crux of it. You took my statement about my neither "saying or implying" that "Duran would hit a prime Whitaker as often as Tito hit a shot Whitaker" to mean that I don't actually think he would. The statement was only meant to clarify what I did not say. If someone responds to an argument that I never made, and yet attributes that argument to me, I call them on it. It's called the straw man fallacy. I believed that you did that.

I don't know that Duran wouldn't find him enough to hurt him. Does that matter? I strongly believe that Duran would be in control of the fight and would be the effective aggressor.

I do know that the Tito fight tells us nothing about Duran-Pea, it only tells us what we already knew about Whitaker -that he had a good chin.

 

Originally Posted by Robbi
Power

Your reply below

Comparing the two in terms of power doesn't bolster the Duran-Whitaker argument either way. You know that the power differential between Duran and Trinidad isn't going to make a difference because their styles are completely different.

Whitaker took Tito's shots. So what? That doesn't mean that Whitaker would stand up to Duran's shots because the fact is, Tito doesn't punch as quickly, as closely, or as often as prime Duran. Never mind the myriad other advantages Duran has offensively, defensively, and simultaneously.



With what I have highlighted is that relevant to the argument of power? I was in no way making a case Whitaker's overall performance against Trinidad to him 'outright' beating Duran at lightweight. I think you went off the rails a little. I was strictly going on the power difference between Duran and Trinidad, nothing else.

You then said on the post that "that doesn't mean that Whitaker would stand up to Duran's because the fact is" then you followed on with comparisons with Trinidad's abilities compared to Duran's. With the highlighted piece your your making a case for Duran being a better fighter than Trinidad in other areas which is true. Why? With such content its as if your saying Duran would be able to hit Whitaker more often because of "Tito doesn't punch as quickly" then everything after that example: Duran's better offense and defense compared to Trinidad. Get my drift? This is where all the confusion started betwen us.

If you go back to page three I was responding to PACFAN, then you came in with your reply.

 

Off the rails? How? My position is simple -and brief: I think that your Tito/Duran (ie. "power") comparison fails. The reason I believe that it fails is, once again, because

an aged Whitaker's taking punches from a robotic Tito has nothing to do a prime Whitaker's taking or not taking shots from a far more actively punching Duran.

-You have reams of argument in response to this? Why? I simply disagree with the comparison for the reason italicized above.

 

Stonehands. Why does it fail?. It's a simple logical comparison to Whitaker taking Duran's punches and lasting the distance. Because he took Trinidad's when he was shot. Duran has less power, then the jigsaw puzzle fits. Duran is highly unlikely, IMO not stopping Whitaker who would be younger and defensively better. But forget defense for a minute, as it's all about when Duran lands punches on Whitaker. You have said that Duran aint hitting Whitaker as often as Trinidad did as you said. "I neither say nor imply that Duran would hit a prime Whitaker as often as Tito hit a shot Whitaker. You arrived at that conclusion on your own"

Yet your more or less saying what you claimed you never with this.

"Tito doesn't punch as quickly, as closely, or as often as prime Duran. Never mind the myriad other advantages Duran has offensively, defensively, and simultaneously"

So what are you trying to say here? Is it irrelevant? I sure think so after piecing things together.


Give me a reason why an aged Whitaker taking punches from a robotic Trinidad, who was involved in a war with a shot Whitaker, has nothing to do with Whitaker taking or not taking punches from an actively more punching Duran.

Lets get back to basics.

Mind now, this arguement started on page three on Whitaker lasting the distance. So lets throw out our arguement on who would win the fight for a moment. Thats not part of the debate, although it has been on other posts on this thread. If you want to refresh things go back to page three and read my reply to PACFAN, which was strictly on, Whitaker taking Duran's punches, not in anyway a case for him beating Duran.

 

To me at least, the Trinidad fight gives me good reason to think that Duran is not taking Whitaker out with any head shots. I don't think it really matters in what variety Duran throws them, or in what sequence he throws them, or with what speed or skill he throws them. Tito cracked like a mother****er and Duran is not going to tag him with 250+ head shots like Tito did. We are assuming that Whitaker isn't going to be drug-destroyed when he meets Duran like he was against Tito of course.

The only argument for why Duran stops Whitaker - and this is where the Tito fight isn't relevant - is that Duran could work him over downstairs and tire him out. Tito didn't land many body punches on Whitaker, hardly any fighter did. The way Whitaker crouched and tucked his elbows in it was very hard to consistently find his body and not even fighters like Chavez were able to do it. It will be hard for Duran to as well, but he fares a better chance of doing it than any other fighter Whitaker faced.

How Whitaker would respond to being consistently hit to the body is something that hasn't really been resolved. Vasquez did land a good many body shots on him and it did make Whitaker uncomfortable, but he didn't land with the frequency needed to really expose if Whitaker had a weakness in taking body shots.

 

Your answer is plain to see in your question.

Tito's offense is nothing like Duran's offense. They are not similar in the least. Their punching styles are not similar in the least. Therefore, I don't think that there is logic in what you said.

Duran's power could be quite shocking in the early 70s, but later, against better guys, it was shown to be that wear-you-down for a TKO kind of power. Lampkin, DeJesus II, III, Brooks. ****, Leonard himself, who was much bigger and stronger than Whitaker, wanted to retire after going 15 in Montreal.

No one should be as certain as you that Whitaker, all of 5'6, would not get worn down and stopped on a TKO over 15 rounds with a raging, non-stop heavy punching Duran. Throwing up Tito for a comparison just doesn't prove or even suggest in my opinion that Whitaker would survive!

 

It would be interesting to see how you match two fighters and come to the conclusion how punch resistance and power are put together when determining the outcome, either this Saturday on HBO or a fantasy match-up from two greats of the past.

I'll confuse things further.

Oliver McCall has a granite chin. Sparred many rounds rounds with Mike Tyson, was rumoured never to be off his feet, and he also took Lewis' bombs and stayed upright after being DQ'd for not defending himself.

McCall v Byrd. Logical conclusion, Byrd aint knocking out McCall.

My conclusion, don't bet on it. Byrd might well get a stoppage.


In no way is the comparison fair to Whitaker lasting with Duran, but just with Stonehands' finishing sentence in the quote above it just makes you wonder.