Pernell Whitaker or Manny Pacqioau greater resume?

[Taeth]

Pac is greater... no question about it. we are in Awe everytime we see Pac annihilates greAT fighters, With Whitaker we're in the snooze mode.

Yes no doubt thats an unbiased opinion based on your name try watching other fighters other than Manny Pacquiao.

Your opinion on Whitaker is as biased as your opinions get, I don't hate on you for it, but he is clearly a guy who you like tremendously, and a guy who you always favor. I agree though that this guy is talking crap, Whitaker was exciting, dynamic, and a great fighter.

[Taeth]

I definitely would argue it, Whitaker was great, but Pacquiao resume was a lot better than Pernell's, and who exactly would have beaten Manny? Julio Cesar Chavez was smaller than Pernell Whitaker, and a similarly smaller JCC in comparison to PAcquiao would not beat him, no way would Chavez be able to deal with his speed and movement.

The difference is Whitaker like Mayweather fought and beat a lot of solid competition, but Pacquiao has foughten and beaten a lot of great competition.

As for a confrontation between Pacquiao and Whitaker, how can you say that Whitaker would win easily? People don't even think Mayweather who is faster, harder to hit, and bigger would win easily. I see Pacquiao who is faster, so busy offensively, and so powerful giving WHitaker all he can handle and more. Whitaker's defense relied on reflexes that wouldn't work against as well against a faster fighter. I have Manny winning 6/10, he's the better fighter.

Also in your list Pacquiao fought Marquezx2 and Barrerax2

I've seen Whitaker's career, and he definitely beats young Pacquiao, but not modern Pacquiao.

And you wonder why people consider you idiot. Whitaker in his prime toys with Pacquiao. Easily. 10 rounds to 2. A shut out wouldn't be out the question. You need to look at Whitaker acutally fight. Instead of just looking at his record, seeing his poor ko % and saying Pac beats him. Cuz that wouldn't be the case.

And if you really think Pac could beat Chavez than your not just an idiot. Your an idiot with a serious crack problem. Prime for prime Chavez would molest Pacquiao the way your uncle did to you as a kid

Whitaker hands down, especially when his two only valid losses were against DLH and Trinidad, and they were in their primes while he clearly wasn't, Chavez not being able to deal with speed and power? Meldrick Taylor IMO was just as fast if not faster than Pacquiao, and could box a hell of a lot better also, difference in Chavez/Pacquiao is that Chavez would have knocked Manny out a lot earlier than the final round

Taylor wasn't as tough, Chavez was younger when he fought Taylor and closer to his prime than when he fought Whitaker, and Meldrick Taylor stood there and traded with Chavez too much, he got caught up in his combinations. Sure he had great speed and boxing ability, but he didn't use his footwork as consistently to maintain to large a gap for Chavez to close like Manny would. Also DLH wasn't in his prime yet when he fought WHiatker, he was still a pup.

[generalbulldog]

Pernell Whitaker is a much much better fight than Pacquiao and Whitaker has the much much better resume. Pacquiao realy hasn't beaten anybody that impresses me besides Juan Manuel Marquez and he barely survived two fights and you can may'be throw in Jorge Solis, but that's reaching. He's beaten a shot Marco Antonio Barrera, Erik Morales, Oscar De La Hoya, and Ricky Hatton. There is nothing about Pacquiao's resume that impresses me, Whitaker hands down it isn't even close.

MAB was hardly shot, Morales still had something left in the 2nd fight, and Ricky Hatton wasn't shot by any means, i don't think Pacquiao's as great as some make him out to be, but he's far from being all hype

I say this is the best objective post in here. Very good analysis. Manny is very good but a tad little hype. Whittaker in his prime will give Pacman trouble by outpointing him.

[JazMerkin]

And you wonder why people consider you idiot. Whitaker in his prime toys with Pacquiao. Easily. 10 rounds to 2. A shut out wouldn't be out the question. You need to look at Whitaker acutally fight. Instead of just looking at his record, seeing his poor ko % and saying Pac beats him. Cuz that wouldn't be the case.

And if you really think Pac could beat Chavez than your not just an idiot. Your an idiot with a serious crack problem. Prime for prime Chavez would molest Pacquiao the way your uncle did to you as a kid

Whitaker hands down, especially when his two only valid losses were against DLH and Trinidad, and they were in their primes while he clearly wasn't, Chavez not being able to deal with speed and power? Meldrick Taylor IMO was just as fast if not faster than Pacquiao, and could box a hell of a lot better also, difference in Chavez/Pacquiao is that Chavez would have knocked Manny out a lot earlier than the final round

Taylor wasn't as tough, Chavez was younger when he fought Taylor and closer to his prime than when he fought Whitaker, and Meldrick Taylor stood there and traded with Chavez too much, he got caught up in his combinations. Sure he had great speed and boxing ability, but he didn't use his footwork as consistently to maintain to large a gap for Chavez to close like Manny would. Also DLH wasn't in his prime yet when he fought WHiatker, he was still a pup.

The Chavez that fought Whitaker was still a prime JCC & he got beat regardless of the corrupt scoring. It wasn't for another few years probably around the Kamau fight that you could say his prime was over. I think Chavez would have been a nightmare for Manny, not because I think he's better, I rate Pac higher, just that I think his swarming style would have got him. He ain't no Ricky Hatton. Also as for the ODLH comment, Oscar was by the time of their fight a 3 weight world champ & had been a pro for nearly 6 years. That isn't a pup, & many think Whitaker won the fight. That is right in Oscar's prime & Whitaker whose prime was over still won in many eyes.

[Taeth]

The problem is styles, Chavez is a hooker, and in order to land a left hook on a southpaw fighter, you have to have enough footspeed to get in close, and Chavez did not have great footspeed, especially at 140 and welterweight. It wasn't just that Chavez wasn't quite in his prime(and he wasn't) Chavez was closer to his prime at the turn of the 90's, but the fact is that Pernell had been fighting around welterweight for awhile before they fought, and Chavez isn't a boxer like Marquez, Mayweather, Pacquiao, he is a straight forward I am going to outtough, and outmuscle you, but when guys like Mosley, Whitaker and OScar used their superior strength he didn't look anywhere near as good. But Chavez looked terrible after the WHitaker fight against Frankie Randall, he wasn't in his prime. The reason why Chavez would have so much trouble around welterweight agianst Pacquiao is simply because he moved so slow, like Cotto he did have a good cross, but if I had to guess who would win if Chavez used his cross against Manny's i think the answer would be pretty clear. Also Chavez isn't Hatton, he has a way better beard, but Hatton had a lot of footspeed to close that gap, and he still got caught coming in. Pacquiao didn't really let Hatton land very effectively on the inside.

I am not comparing p4p Chavez to Pacquiao, he was a different beast at lightweight, but that wasn't the guy who fought Whitaker.

When it comes to Mayweather, Whitaker, and Pacquiao I don't see a huge variation in skill level, obviously Mayweather and Whitaker are the better defensive fighters, but Pacquiao's offensive skills are at the same level as their defensive skills, and he has gotten way better defensively. The problem for Whitaker IMO is that 1) He had a lot of solid but not great competition like I've said. 2) He isn't as fast as the other two, and he really relies on being the faster man.

I am not trying to say Pacquiao is a god like some guys on here claim, but people need to wake up and smell the coffey, he along with Marquez have proven themselves to be tacticians of the very highest order. They combine all the attributes that make a great fighter power, speed, evasiveness, footwork, stamina, huge competitive edge, heart, determination, technique, and well roundedness.

3 years ago you could say Pacquiao wasn't well rounded, but now its clear to see he is, he can counter, he can lead, he used both hands very well, he can brawl, punch, etc, etc.

[Violent Demise]

I definitely would argue it, Whitaker was great, but Pacquiao resume was a lot better than Pernell's, and who exactly would have beaten Manny? Julio Cesar Chavez was smaller than Pernell Whitaker, and a similarly smaller JCC in comparison to PAcquiao would not beat him, no way would Chavez be able to deal with his speed and movement.

The difference is Whitaker like Mayweather fought and beat a lot of solid competition, but Pacquiao has foughten and beaten a lot of great competition.

As for a confrontation between Pacquiao and Whitaker, how can you say that Whitaker would win easily? People don't even think Mayweather who is faster, harder to hit, and bigger would win easily. I see Pacquiao who is faster, so busy offensively, and so powerful giving WHitaker all he can handle and more. Whitaker's defense relied on reflexes that wouldn't work against as well against a faster fighter. I have Manny winning 6/10, he's the better fighter.

Also in your list Pacquiao fought Marquezx2 and Barrerax2

I've seen Whitaker's career, and he definitely beats young Pacquiao, but not modern Pacquiao.

And you wonder why people consider you idiot. Whitaker in his prime toys with Pacquiao. Easily. 10 rounds to 2. A shut out wouldn't be out the question. You need to look at Whitaker acutally fight. Instead of just looking at his record, seeing his poor ko % and saying Pac beats him. Cuz that wouldn't be the case.

And if you really think Pac could beat Chavez than your not just an idiot. Your an idiot with a serious crack problem. Prime for prime Chavez would molest Pacquiao the way your uncle did to you as a kid

Your the fucking idiot, Did you see prime Chavez against amateur MOsley? He got his ass kicked in sparring. You guys say I overhype Pacquiao, yet you are the ones who are saying that Whitaker has the better resume?

What part of prime for prime did your dumb ass not understand? You keeping talking about the Chavez that fought Whitaker. That Chavez wasn't a prime Chavez. Chavez at 147 squeaks by a 147 Pacquiao. But at 130, 135 Chavez walks right through Pacquiao

[mad_takamura]

I definitely would argue it, Whitaker was great, but Pacquiao resume was a lot better than Pernell's, and who exactly would have beaten Manny? Julio Cesar Chavez was smaller than Pernell Whitaker, and a similarly smaller JCC in comparison to PAcquiao would not beat him, no way would Chavez be able to deal with his speed and movement.

The difference is Whitaker like Mayweather fought and beat a lot of solid competition, but Pacquiao has foughten and beaten a lot of great competition.

As for a confrontation between Pacquiao and Whitaker, how can you say that Whitaker would win easily? People don't even think Mayweather who is faster, harder to hit, and bigger would win easily. I see Pacquiao who is faster, so busy offensively, and so powerful giving WHitaker all he can handle and more. Whitaker's defense relied on reflexes that wouldn't work against as well against a faster fighter. I have Manny winning 6/10, he's the better fighter.

Also in your list Pacquiao fought Marquezx2 and Barrerax2

I've seen Whitaker's career, and he definitely beats young Pacquiao, but not modern Pacquiao.

And you wonder why people consider you idiot. Whitaker in his prime toys with Pacquiao. Easily. 10 rounds to 2. A shut out wouldn't be out the question. You need to look at Whitaker acutally fight. Instead of just looking at his record, seeing his poor ko % and saying Pac beats him. Cuz that wouldn't be the case.

And if you really think Pac could beat Chavez than your not just an idiot. Your an idiot with a serious crack problem. Prime for prime Chavez would molest Pacquiao the way your uncle did to you as a kid

easy for you to say just because this fight did'nt and would'nt ever happen. who knows?