Recently I have become interested in Sweet Pea and was wondering what was the quality of his resume like? Is it greater or worse than present day Pacqiuo and say who Whitaker beat of quality
Thanks
Printable View
Recently I have become interested in Sweet Pea and was wondering what was the quality of his resume like? Is it greater or worse than present day Pacqiuo and say who Whitaker beat of quality
Thanks
Well obviously Manny Pacquiao has won more titles, but opposition wise its clearly Pernell Whitaker.Quote:
Originally Posted by Motor City Cobra
Pernell Whitaker
Azumah Nelson
Julio Cesar Chavez
Jose Luis Ramirez x2
Wilfredo Rivera x2
Diosbelys Hurtado
Julio Cesar Vasquez
Rafael Pineda
Roger Mayweather
Greg Haugen
Freddie Pendleton
Jorge Paez
Policarpo Diaz
Anthony Jones
Manny Pacquiao
Jorge Solis
JMM
MAB x2
Erik Morales x2
Ricky Hatton
ODLH
Jorge Eliecer Julio
David Diaz
Oscar Larios
Hector Velazquez
And to be honest put Manny Pacquiao in with some of Pernell Whitaker's opposition, and im pretty sure he would lose atleast 3 times. Put Pernell Whitaker in with Manny Pacquiao's opposition. and he would beat them all quite comfortably except JMM.
And remember im talking about MAB, Erik Morales, at the stage of there career when Manny Pacquiao beat them. Pernell Whitaker would of had no real problems beating those versions of MAB, Erik Morales.
And lets be honest Pernell Whitaker P4P would of gave Manny Pacquiao, a boxing lesson end of and if anyone has seen a prime Pernell Whitaker. I can't see how anyone could argue against it.
Every boxing fan needs Pernell's career set. I would STRONGLY suggest getting hold of it if somehow if you are interested in him.
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.
People need to stop overrating Manny Pacquiao seriously, you don't think JCC wouldn't have beat Manny Pacquiao ? Manny Pacquiao is quick but hittable and very open for body shots, JCC would drag Manny Pacquiao into a place he's never been in before and stop him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
And what about Azumah Nelson ? you don't think he would be able to beat Manny Pacquiao either ? hell even a 100 percent James McGirt would stand a good chance.
And what do you mean Manny Pacquiao fought and beat great competition ? he beat a faded Erik Morales the same Erik Morales who was beaten up by Zahir Raheem. He beat MAB yes but there were circumstances surronding the 1st fight, but yes he does deserve alot of credit for that win, but MAB and was near enough shot in there 2nd meeting.
Ricky Hatton isn't great ODLH was great about 8 years ago, and he was weight drained and hadn't fought at Welterweight in years. And yes i listed JMM only once because he only beat him once, and infact i thought JMM beat Manny Pacquiao twice.
Beating Azumah Nelson and a P4P number 1 JCC is far and away a greater achievement. Hell Pernell Whitaker arguably beat a prime ODLH when he was past his prime.
Pernell Whitaker would run rings round Manny Pacquiao, come on get off the Manny Pacquiao bandwagon. Just because he beat Ricky Hatton and a way past his prime ODLH now he's a Pernell Whitaker beater ?
Give me a break Pernell Whitaker would of destroyed that version of ODLH, hell he even made a prime one look pretty ordinary, and Pernell Whitaker gave a much better version of Ricky Hatton aka JCC a boxing lesson. You don't think Pernell Whitaker wouldn't of made Ricky Hatton look stupid ?
I mean honestly this is still the same Manny Pacquiao, who went life and death with JMM. Pernell Whitaker is faster than JMM, much better defensively. And can counter punch just as good and he certainly has a superior jab.
I mean except for JMM who honestly on Manny Pacquiao's resume, would have even won more than 4 rounds against Pernell Whitaker ? and we are talking about the version's of Morales, Barrera, that Manny Pacquiao beat.
No way on earth would Manny Pacquiao beat a prime Pernell Whitaker, jesus people seriously do overrate Manny Pacquiao on this board.
Hands down Whitaker.No doubt in my mind.Both will go down as greats,but there was only one Pernell.Manny for all intents and purposes when it relates too outstanding at the moment competition boils down the four fighters.
resume is Whitaker clearly.
Whitaker has a very impressive resume but I'm not going to lie as much as I love the sweet science there really was not to many of Pernell's fights that did not put me to sleep when I watched him. Manny has a very good resume and many more hits to come. Also keep in mind that Pacman is still only 30 years old and has at least 5 more good years left in him before his career is done. As of now Pernell has a better resume but Pacman is not done and will probably surpass him in the end.
Sweet Pea has the better resume. Manny is a great fighter, but Pea was a more complete fighter imo. If you put Manny in with his opposition, Manny would have 4 or 5 loses at least imo. He can be outboxed, just not by old Oscar, Hatton, or Diaz. They made him look good....he IS good, great even, but Whittaker was a bit better. What makes Manny immpressive is that he has moved up though weight classes and continued to win immpressively and keep his speed and power. What made Pea immpressive was his boxing ability and defence that allowed him to move up in weight and have sucess. He was a master boxer. In terms of his career, I equate Mannys resume with someone like Mayweather or Roy Jones. As for Pea, I equate him more with a Sugar Ray Leonard. Mannys career is not over yet though, so he can still end his career with the better resume.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
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
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.
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 roundQuote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseAnd 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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
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
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 hypeQuote:
Originally Posted by "The L.A. Earthquake"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseAnd 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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
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
Not to forget that this is the same VD who said DLH will murder Pacquaio and HAtton will crack his ribs. LOL.;D;D;D
Then you're not watching boxing. His wins over Ledwaba, BArrera, Morales, DLH,Hatton impressed the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by "The L.A. Earthquake"
PAc first fought a BARRERA THAT WAS POUND FOR POUND NUMBER2 in many people's eyes that time. Some would even argue that he is pound for pound #1. Remember the title "KING OF THE FEATHERWEIGHT?" How can you say he was shot?
Watch pac's fights and tell me you're not impressed.;D;D;D
Please see above the correct spelling of Manny's family name...fyi
Whittaker....man he was something else.
I'm one of the guys that believes he never actually lost;D
His evasiveness was just incredible.
He mastered boxing.
I like Pacquiao and think he's an ATG, but Pernell's resume is better and if they fought Manny would be soundly beaten
I used to think Manny was all speed, a little bit of power but had very crude boxing skills. Yet, he did improve and continuously does so every fight after his loss to Morales. That is what is makes him different. It would be unfair to compare both fighters now. Let us wait till Manny retires and judge him then. As it is, Pernell's record and abilities may give him the edge for now. However, if Manny fights Mayweather, JMM (again), Cotto, maybe Mosely and wins convincingly, then there will be no question who has a better resume and who is a better fighter. Hell even if he loses to one of the four mentioned, I would probably cast my vote his (MP) way.
Whitaker all day, the guy really was something else, for my money, the greatest fighter of the 90s ahead of Roy Jones & that is saying a lot because Jones was amazing. Apart from the Trinidad fight which he clearly lost, but he was shot by then & the following Bojoruez fight when he broke his collar bone (& even then I thought he would of won had that not happened), I think he won every fight of his career. I thought he edged ODLH, although it was close, I got the impression he would have had to have got a near shutout to win, he most DEFINITELY beat JCC & the corruption that robbed him in the Ramirez fight defied belief (even rounds my ass)
I thought he done pretty good against a prime Felix Trinidad, considering how past his prime he was. I think he won 3 or 4 rounds, and he was able to really hurt Felix Trinidad to the body in round 7. In that fight you see a great older fighter, who lost his reflexes and speed.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkin
And he had to slug it out and you really see how much heart and how good of a chin, Pernell Whitaker had. And not many people know that Pernell Whitaker actually had a broken jaw aswell.
Delete triple post by accident.
I agree, I thought he took 3 rounds, maybe 4 at most, but he still clearly lost. I think if that fight was a year earlier, he wins it, but by then he just wasn't what he once was.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBI thought he done pretty good against a prime Felix Trinidad, considering how past his prime he was. I think he won 3 or 4 rounds, and he was able to really hurt Felix Trinidad to the body in round 7. In that fight you see a great older fighter, who lost his reflexes and speed.Quote:
Originally Posted by JazMerkin
And he had to slug it out and you really see how much heart and how good of a chin, Pernell Whitaker had. And not many people know that Pernell Whitaker actually had a broken jaw aswell.
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.
Who was greater in your opinion Pac or Sugar Ray Robinson?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pacdbest2
I have no doubt that you have no clue who Whitaker isQuote:
Originally Posted by bruceleeThen you're not watching boxing. His wins over Ledwaba, BArrera, Morales, DLH,Hatton impressed the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by "The L.A. Earthquake"
PAc first fought a BARRERA THAT WAS POUND FOR POUND NUMBER2 in many people's eyes that time. Some would even argue that he is pound for pound #1. Remember the title "KING OF THE FEATHERWEIGHT?" How can you say he was shot?
Watch pac's fights and tell me you're not impressed.;D;D;D
I'll spot you Barrera 1st time around.Lost on what other greats he has annihilated.Ledwaba...Lucero ???Quote:
Originally Posted by Pacdbest2
Yes no doubt thats an unbiased opinion based on your name :rolleyes: try watching other fighters other than Manny Pacquiao.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pacdbest2
Whitaker's is better for now.
But LOL, some of you guys are talking about a top 40 all time fighter like he's some scrub. Chavez-Pacquaio is a great fight.
And making excuses for the first Barrera fight is so tired. Barrera was in or around his physical prime and Pacqauio annihalated him. Nothing fluky about it.
Although, I didn't actually talk about Pac, I agree on the first MAB fight, people can't make excuses about Barrera's personal life, because they sure wouldn't do it if it was a less popular fighter. That was a fantastic win.Quote:
Originally Posted by OumaFan
However, on comparing the 2, whilst Pac is a top 40 atg (right now), maybe top 30 for me, Whitaker is in most top 20s and in a lot of top 10s, hence why some reactions might be a little harsh, especially when you get certain people who act like boxing didn't exist before Pacquiao
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseAnd 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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
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
RIcky Hatton, Marquezx2, Barrerax2, Moralesx2 were all in the top 10 p4p when Pacquiao fought them. The third Morales fight I don't consider much, but the second one was a good version of Morales, he was quick, sharp and determined, but Manny broke him. Everybody has bad fights saying the Zahir Raheem fight defined Morales at that stage of his career is like saying Whitaker's first fight against Ramirez defined his ability as a fighter, or Floyd Mayweather against Castillo in their first fight, or Hopkins against Mercado. Sometimes people have bad fights and they just don't bring it like they normally do. If you insinuating that Morales wasn't near top form(obviously he wasn't in his prime, but he was physically in great shape for hte second PAcquiao fight).
Furthermore I've seen Whitaker's career, and I love him as a fighter, but that doesn't automatically make him 10x better than PAcquiao, that would be a stupid assumption. Sure Mayweather and Pacquiao fought Oscar after his prime, but WHitaker fought him before it, and still didn't win.
Pacquiao fought three mexicans who among them two have had careers that some people think equal that of JCC, and the third isn't far behind. Not only that but JCC like I said was coming up to face Whitaker.
Half the guys ICB mentioned on WHitaker's resume like Haugen, etc were c or b- type fighters, the guys like that on Pacquiao's resume don't even get mentioned because there is no need for that, he has foughten so many fights against A- or higher opponents like HAtton, Morales, Barrera, Marquez, and Oscar De La Hoya, and its not just that he fought them, but the three mexicans on that list he faced a total of 7 times and he came out 5-1-1. He beat Oscar worse than Mayweather did, and he beat Hatton way worse than Mayweather did. Make all the excuses you want(even i want to make them because I like Floyd better), but he did it.
Furthermore styles, Whitaker was arrogant to the nine. He would leave his hands down because his reflexes and speed were superior to any person he faced in his career(except maybe Oscar by that point), but Whitaker was still significantly slower than Pacquiao or Mayweather, and his tactics wouldn't have worked against them, if he tried to keep his hands down, PAcquiao would have land on him for sure.
As for how Pacquiao would do against the guys Whitaker faced honestly JCC's style against current Pacman woudln't have worked that simply because of footspeed, we saw JCC have a terrible time trying to find Whitaker when he was moving, or Meldrick Taylor when he didn't stand and trade. Pacquiao would have been able to get in and out at will against JCC, and he wasn't the same level of counter puncher that Barrera or Marquez are, nor did he have their speed. Furthermore had Pacquiao fought JCC under the same circumstances as WHitaker, it would have been him that would have been the naturally larger man. I can concede that at the same size a grinder like JCC would give PAcquiao a ton of trouble, but if PAcquiao was the bigger faster man, it would have been JCC who would be wearing down late, just like he did against Whitaker. Like Azumah Nelson they both fought Whitaker in weights higher and past their prime. Sure Azumah had exciting fights with Fenech after that, but do you honestly think Leija could have beaten a prime A. Nelson?
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICBYes no doubt thats an unbiased opinion based on your name :rolleyes: try watching other fighters other than Manny Pacquiao.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pacdbest2
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMoralesWhitaker 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 roundQuote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseAnd 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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
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
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMoralesMAB 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 hypeQuote:
Originally Posted by "The L.A. Earthquake"
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by TaethTaylor 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.Quote:
Originally Posted by ElTerribleMoralesWhitaker 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 roundQuote:
Originally Posted by Violent Demise
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.
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 PacquiaoQuote:
Originally Posted by TaethYour 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?Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseAnd 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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by Violent DemiseAnd 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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
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