Thread: Who would have beaten a prime Whitaker?

I've watched almost all of his fights except his last 2 where he soundly lost. But in his prime the man's defense and boxing skills was something to behold. Sweetpea never lost in his prime, I don't count the robbery in the Ramirez fight as a loss especially since most have him winning anywhere from 8-10 rounds. And I'm talking about his prime from 1984-1994, from LW to WW.

IMO in boxing history it would be an extremely hard task to have beaten that prime version. But for fun who could have beaten him or made it extremely competitive? Duran? Leonard? Hearns? Mayweather? Trinidad? Pacquiao? Chavez at 135 or 140?

Aaron Pryor

The same who beat him in real life, the judges

At lightweight only Duran stood a chance. At the higher weights probably more of the greats like SRL, SRR, Hearns but he was really unbeaten for many years, probably until ODH.

I think mayweather beats at any weight they occupy, he's harder to hit, faster, bigger, and he works harder. He's simply better than Whitaker.

Duran also likely beats him, Whitaker couldn't move like Leonard did, and Duran would just go to the body and make an ugly inside fight, but he's bigger and better than jcc.

Leonard and hearns I think they beat him because both are excellent fighters with a huge size advantage while both are also faster than him.

Aaron Pryor and pacquiao both best whitaker because they have to great a combination of speed, output and pressure.

I've watched a lot of Whitaker, and he's one of my favorites, but he simply relied on his reflexes far too much, the actual technique needed against a lot of these guys' speed simply isn't there, and he didn't control the ring the same way a lot these guys did.

Originally Posted by Taeth

I think mayweather beats at any weight they occupy, he's harder to hit, faster, bigger, and he works harder. He's simply better than Whitaker.

Duran also likely beats him, Whitaker couldn't move like Leonard did, and Duran would just go to the body and make an ugly inside fight, but he's bigger and better than jcc.

Leonard and hearns I think they beat him because both are excellent fighters with a huge size advantage while both are also faster than him.

Aaron Pryor and pacquiao both best whitaker because they have to great a combination of speed, output and pressure.

I've watched a lot of Whitaker, and he's one of my favorites, but he simply relied on his reflexes far too much, the actual technique needed against a lot of these guys' speed simply isn't there, and he didn't control the ring the same way a lot these guys did.

surprise surprise Taeth once again making it seem as if no one in the history of the sport could beat Mayweather...

Very good body puncher and awkward and hard to hit, think he beats Mayweather at lightweight.

Originally Posted by Master

Very good body puncher and awkward and hard to hit, think he beats Mayweather at lightweight.

I feel the same way, the only one that has a chance like you've said is Duran at LW.

Don't forget Willie Pep. Battle of the master boxers ..... but with Sweet Pea's superior conditioning going up against Pep's toughness too.

I had a thread a while back in which I pitted Duran vs Whitaker @ lightweight and got a lot of good responses. I think Whitaker was best @ 135 and pretty close to unbeatable at that weight. I agree with the previous posts that said Duran would have a good chance but outside of him I don't think there was anyone who could whip SweetPea at lightweight. That being said I believe he could be defeated at 140 and 147 by some of the greats. Whitaker's reflexes and defense just wouldn't allow for him to be soundly beaten at those weights but it could be done because Whitaker was not a huge guy......even at lightweight. I would give Mayweather, Pacquiao, SRL, Hearns(how will Whitaker combat the reach) a chance at jr welter and welter but his style just makes it difficult to say that anyone would DEFINITELY beat him in his prime. Just too cagey and awkward.

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Originally Posted by Taeth

I think mayweather beats at any weight they occupy, he's harder to hit, faster, bigger, and he works harder. He's simply better than Whitaker.

Duran also likely beats him, Whitaker couldn't move like Leonard did, and Duran would just go to the body and make an ugly inside fight, but he's bigger and better than jcc.

Leonard and hearns I think they beat him because both are excellent fighters with a huge size advantage while both are also faster than him.

Aaron Pryor and pacquiao both best whitaker because they have to great a combination of speed, output and pressure.

I've watched a lot of Whitaker, and he's one of my favorites, but he simply relied on his reflexes far too much, the actual technique needed against a lot of these guys' speed simply isn't there, and he didn't control the ring the same way a lot these guys did.

surprise surprise Taeth once again making it seem as if no one in the history of the sport could beat Mayweather...

I've never seen Taeth do this, but in this case I have to agree with him. Whitaker had superb defensive skills, but Mayweather simply works harder and possesses better offensive skills than Pernell and would have taken a judges decision had they have fought.

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Originally Posted by Taeth

I think mayweather beats at any weight they occupy, he's harder to hit, faster, bigger, and he works harder. He's simply better than Whitaker.

Duran also likely beats him, Whitaker couldn't move like Leonard did, and Duran would just go to the body and make an ugly inside fight, but he's bigger and better than jcc.

Leonard and hearns I think they beat him because both are excellent fighters with a huge size advantage while both are also faster than him.

Aaron Pryor and pacquiao both best whitaker because they have to great a combination of speed, output and pressure.

I've watched a lot of Whitaker, and he's one of my favorites, but he simply relied on his reflexes far too much, the actual technique needed against a lot of these guys' speed simply isn't there, and he didn't control the ring the same way a lot these guys did.

surprise surprise Taeth once again making it seem as if no one in the history of the sport could beat Mayweather...

I think he compete with anyone around his weightclass in the history of the sport, but I think he can be beaten. I just don't think Whitaker would be the guy to do it. He's outgunned in every facet, just go look at the stats he was hit far more than Floyd. I think guys like hearns and Leonard and Robinson could definitely beat Floyd, but I think he could beat them as well. Is there any harm in that?

Originally Posted by bzkfn

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Originally Posted by Taeth

I think mayweather beats at any weight they occupy, he's harder to hit, faster, bigger, and he works harder. He's simply better than Whitaker.

Duran also likely beats him, Whitaker couldn't move like Leonard did, and Duran would just go to the body and make an ugly inside fight, but he's bigger and better than jcc.

Leonard and hearns I think they beat him because both are excellent fighters with a huge size advantage while both are also faster than him.

Aaron Pryor and pacquiao both best whitaker because they have to great a combination of speed, output and pressure.

I've watched a lot of Whitaker, and he's one of my favorites, but he simply relied on his reflexes far too much, the actual technique needed against a lot of these guys' speed simply isn't there, and he didn't control the ring the same way a lot these guys did.

surprise surprise Taeth once again making it seem as if no one in the history of the sport could beat Mayweather...

I've never seen Taeth do this, but in this case I have to agree with him. Whitaker had superb defensive skills, but Mayweather simply works harder and possesses better offensive skills than Pernell and would have taken a judges decision had they have fought.

just read most of his posts where he mentions Mayweather in nearly everyone of them, he builds him to be the #1 ATG fighter in the history of the sport

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Originally Posted by bzkfn

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Originally Posted by Taeth

I think mayweather beats at any weight they occupy, he's harder to hit, faster, bigger, and he works harder. He's simply better than Whitaker.

Duran also likely beats him, Whitaker couldn't move like Leonard did, and Duran would just go to the body and make an ugly inside fight, but he's bigger and better than jcc.

Leonard and hearns I think they beat him because both are excellent fighters with a huge size advantage while both are also faster than him.

Aaron Pryor and pacquiao both best whitaker because they have to great a combination of speed, output and pressure.

I've watched a lot of Whitaker, and he's one of my favorites, but he simply relied on his reflexes far too much, the actual technique needed against a lot of these guys' speed simply isn't there, and he didn't control the ring the same way a lot these guys did.

surprise surprise Taeth once again making it seem as if no one in the history of the sport could beat Mayweather...

I've never seen Taeth do this, but in this case I have to agree with him. Whitaker had superb defensive skills, but Mayweather simply works harder and possesses better offensive skills than Pernell and would have taken a judges decision had they have fought.

just read most of his posts where he mentions Mayweather in nearly everyone of them, he builds him to be the #1 ATG fighter in the history of the sport

Fair enough. I've seen him post bout plenty of other things though, he's hardly a Xadu is he? I don't think any fighter in the history of the sport would have beaten a prime Roy Jones Jr. It's all opinion.

Lightweights
Joe Gans
Roberto Duran
Willie Pep
Benny Leonard
Light Welterweights
Aaron Pryor
Kostya Tszyu
Floyd Mayweather
Welterweight
Henry Armstrong
Actually never mind 147- quit a few would here