Where do you rank Pernell Whitaker on the all-time great list ?????
He had the style to beat everyone, nobody could hit him, he should have went into the Trinidad fight with no losses.
Re: Where do you rank Pernell Whitaker on the all-time great list ?????
I rank him pretty high especially after his big win over Julio Vasquez. I wonder why him and Camacho never fought? Because I think that could have been a very entertaining fight.
Re: Where do you rank Pernell Whitaker on the all-time great list ?????
I'd put him right in there with Gans, Leonard, Duran, Armstrong, Williams and the like. Easy top 10 at lightweight and maybe top 5 on many lists.
Re: Where do you rank Pernell Whitaker on the all-time great list ?????
Pernell, to me, deserves the highest accolades you could give a boxer.
It drives me nuts that people think Duran was better, or that he would have whipped Pernell at LW.
For my money, nobody beats prime Sweetpea at LW. He would have made Duran look foolish.
Re: Where do you rank Pernell Whitaker on the all-time great list ?????
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
Pernell, to me, deserves the highest accolades you could give a boxer.
It drives me nuts that people think Duran was better, or that he would have whipped Pernell at LW.
For my money, nobody beats prime Sweetpea at LW. He would have made Duran look foolish.
Man, you are one brave fella. I imagine they're going to give it to you for daring that Duran was not the best lightweight. I said this to people in the gym and it was like I talked bad about their mama. But I strongly agree with you. I just don't see anyone beating Pernell Whitaker at his best. I think Chavez was better than Duran as well. But clearly Whitaker was. Just one man's opinion.
Re: Where do you rank Pernell Whitaker on the all-time great list ?????
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Jerry Rice
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jehoshaphat
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
Pernell, to me, deserves the highest accolades you could give a boxer.
It drives me nuts that people think Duran was better, or that he would have whipped Pernell at LW.
For my money, nobody beats prime Sweetpea at LW. He would have made Duran look foolish.
Man, you are one brave fella. I imagine they're going to give it to you for daring that Duran was not the best lightweight. I said this to people in the gym and it was like I talked bad about their mama. But I strongly agree with you. I just don't see anyone beating Pernell Whitaker at his best. I think Chavez was better than Duran as well. But clearly Whitaker was. Just one man's opinion.
I doubt people in your gym have ever even seen Duran fight or were born in his prime.
Then you'd be wrong. We have several older guys in the gym. The 3 coaches are all at or around 60 and 2 guys in their 50s who help train. Also 2 guys near 40 who were once ranked as amateurs still train as such. I personally just hang out really. But I'm not talking about the youngsters in this occasion although they deserve a voice. Besides, there is plenty of tape out there. But we have a little lounge and its like barber shop talk. A few of us older fellas. We tend to get into talks/debates. They tend to think every newer era is softer. Too coddled. Maybe so. I personally think that when you get to the cream of the crop that arguments goes away.
Re: Where do you rank Pernell Whitaker on the all-time great list ?????
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
I'd put him right in there with Gans, Leonard, Duran, Armstrong, Williams and the like. Easy top 10 at lightweight and maybe top 5 on many lists.
I think only Duran would have beaten Sweat Pea at lightweight but at welter Pernell wins.
Re: Where do you rank Pernell Whitaker on the all-time great list ?????
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
IamInuit
I'd put him right in there with Gans, Leonard, Duran, Armstrong, Williams and the like. Easy top 10 at lightweight and maybe top 5 on many lists.
I think only Duran would have beaten Sweat Pea at lightweight but at welter Pernell wins.
That is cool. I'd put him just below the 5 I mentioned at 135 but have no issues with those who would rank him higher.
Re: Where do you rank Pernell Whitaker on the all-time great list ?????
I don't rank Whitaker as highly as most. If I ever took the time to make a list of the guys I consider the top 100 p4p fighters, he wouldn't be on it, but then neither would Ali.
As a LW he isn't beating Duran, Benny Leonard, Armstrong, Ike Williams, Gans. I don't see him beating Beau Jack or Bob Montgomery, after talking to people that saw them (and Whitaker) fight from ringside. I don't think he beats Lou Ambers, who gave Armstrong such hard fights. I don't think he beats Carlos Ortiz and I don't think he beats Ismael Laguna.
At WW, he doesn't do well with the champions of the division. Even the overlooked guys like Zivic beat him; he fought Robinson tooth and nail twice, beat LaMotta and lost 3 or 4 split decisions to him. Guys like Tommy Bell beat him, and he was never champ, same with Charlie Burley.
At LW he might make my top 20, if I ever made a list. Not my top 50 at WW. Too many really good fighters and Whitaker's shuck and jive nonsense wouldn't impress them and, offensively, he didn't have enough to hang with the guys that would fight through his games.
Re: Where do you rank Pernell Whitaker on the all-time great list ?????
Just because guys have been around forever doesn't mean they are any more objective or less prone to revisionist history, if anything the opposite is true imo. I think many people are always biased towards the fighters which turned them on to the sport. The younger members of this forum will probably grow old talking about how so and so would have never beat a prime Roy Jones or Pacquiao, no matter what they learn about the sport or who else is around in 30 years.
Fritzie Zivic probably wouldn't make it out of the 2nd round without being DQ'ed in a modern prizefight, just for instance.
Re: Where do you rank Pernell Whitaker on the all-time great list ?????
Quote:
Originally Posted by
p4pking
Just because guys have been around forever doesn't mean they are any more objective or less prone to revisionist history, if anything the opposite is true imo. I think many people are always biased towards the fighters which turned them on to the sport. The younger members of this forum will probably grow old talking about how so and so would have never beat a prime Roy Jones or Pacquiao, no matter what they learn about the sport or who else is around in 30 years.
Fritzie Zivic probably wouldn't make it out of the 2nd round without being DQ'ed in a modern prizefight, just for instance.
I think that there is a great deal of truth to that first part. Zivic was known as a very clever boxer with a good jab and solid right hand, as well as being a tremendous body puncher. He did a lot more than fight 'dirty'
Re: Where do you rank Pernell Whitaker on the all-time great list ?????
Pernell was a special talent. I find it insulting when people say old school guys would have beaten him, or Duran would have KO'd him. Whitaker was about as good as it gets at the sweet science. He'd have those idiots swinging and hitting air.
I don't know why people underrate Pernell so badly. How someone can only have Pernell in their top 20 is absolutely insane. Especially to rank guys over him who we've never seen fight, who all we know about is from press clippings. Sheesh.
To me, it's always like the science vs religion argument. You guys can believe the fantasy tales about guys from 100 years ago being complete world beaters who would chase our modern greats out of the ring. Worship and that church, be my guest.
Me? I'm going to believe in the greatness I can see.
Re: Where do you rank Pernell Whitaker on the all-time great list ?????
I'm sure he was, but if you're intentionally thumbing people in the eyes, throwing elbows like jabs and headbutting repeatedly on HBO it isn't going to fly. There are probably a bunch of journeyman today that could be world class if they got a pass for that.
