Why did Whitaker get a reputation as boring?

It kind of started with the Freddie Pendleton fight and continued with bouts against guys like Santos Cardona, "Baby" Jones, Harold Brazier, even Jorge Paez.

Pendleton, Cardona, Brazier and Jones were basically ESPN quality fighters. You figure a "great" fighter wouldn't have to go 12 rounds with them. Paez had been a featherweight champ but wasn't really dominant as such. Most thought Paez lost BOTH fights to Troy Dorsey. Same with the Espinoza bouts.

And Paez had struggled as a lightweight. Whitaker was a monster favorite over him. And it was just another decision win for Whitaker. Rafael Ruelas had an easier time with Paez a year later and stopped him, and Ruelas was nothing special.

It was just the fact that even when Whitaker faced guys who really had no business in the ring with him, they'd go the distance.

Fans appreciate good boxing. But if you have clearly demonstrated your dominance, they want you to finish a guy. "Close the show" as they say. They don't want to see you dominate a guy, and then end the fight mugging and clowning and making faces. It just points out the fact that you can't finish the guy ... and that's a deficiency on your part.

 

Some of his bouts were almost tedious at times.

 

This is rich coming from a Mayweather hugger... "if you have clearly demonstrated your dominance, they want you to finish a guy". The double standards here are so rich it's palpable.

 

Tediously dominate.

 

You're wrong about Pendleton and Brazier

They were world class just not in the rarified elite.

Pendleton KOd Roger Mayweather and Bramble, and drew with a prime Frankie Randall. Brazier lost a very close decision to Mayweather and lost decisions to Meldrick Taylor and Whitaker.

True, they were on ESPN quite a bit but were Network and lower level PPV material.


Another guy I would put in their category would be Terrence Alli.

Paez, Haughen and especially Ramirez were extremely durable, as well.


Pernell simply lacked the fire power to ko any elite competition.

But, of course, he was a great fighter.

 

Wrong.

Scoring shutout decisions and other wide UD's is not "just enough to win."

He lacked the punching power to consistently hurt and/or stop elite competition, otherwise he had everything.

Even so, he did score exciting KOs against a couple of world class fighters - Nazario and Hurtato.


I thought you were a self-professed historian/expert?

 

Yes, dominant at times. But tedious, nevertheless.

 

I agree.

 

I wouldn't classify Pendleton or Brazier or Santos Cardona or Anthony "Baby" Jones as elite. Not at all.

They fought on ESPN all the time because they were "ESPN Quality" fighters.

 

How about the Mayweather's KO's I was looking for that I'm sure he must have considering your post about Whitaker.

 

So totally dominating guys, and virtually wining every round of fights, means he was doing just enough to win.... Gotcha...

 

Watch the Chavez fight again pal, there was only two rounds in that fight where Whitaker did any real fighting and those rounds came after he nailed Chavez twice in the gonads.

Whitaker was a terrific boxer with masterful defense, but its the fights against B and C level opposition that I would criticize him for. Many of those guys were so over matched that Whitaker could have stepped on the gas pedal a lot more and made the fight more entertaining. But like Mayweather and Hopkins, for the most part he chose to play it safe and was content to go the distance against overmatched fighters.

Against less than A level opposition, if you saw one Pernell Whitaker round, you saw them all.
That's why Whitaker was considered boring. Every round the complete replica of the previous just puts you in a position as a viewer where you just become uninterested and stop paying close attention to the action.

Btw, I'd much prefer to watch the lightweight version of Floyd Mayweather over Pernell Whitaker any day.
Mayweather only become safety conscious when he moved up to 147 lbs, before then he layed it on overmatched opposition like Manfredy, Gatti, etc......

 

I bought into the reputation at the time, but in retrospect, Whitaker was a lot more entertaining than given credit for being. Scored a couple of nasty one shot kayos of Nazario and Lomeli at lightweight, came off the canvas to defeat Hurtado by rather brutal stoppage, had entertaining fights against a fired-up Pendleton and Roger Mayweather, had a gripping two fight series against McGirt and another intriguing pair against Rivera. Didn't hold, often stayed in front of opponents, and was pretty active.

You could watch less exciting fighters, that's for sure.