Nelson Vs whitaker

[Robot16]

A question about Pernell Whitaker And Azumah Nelson's fight.
First of all was it a good fight, entertaining?
Also was Azumah regarded as a big threat to pernell, didnt azumah only have one loss.
Any info would be good thanks.

Also i saw the junior jones and kennedy mkinney fight.
It was a good fight.

[Robot16]

I thought it was entertaining but then i also think most of Hopkins and Winky´s fights are entertaining which not that many people agree with.
ok thanks

[Cobra33]

It was beautiful boxing exhibition by Pernell.Nelson won maybe 3 rounds at most.Sweet Pea pretty much dominated the entire bout with his jab and stepping around Nelson.

[Robbi]

Whitaker was at his sublime best against Nelson. He fought very intelligently as Nelson was known as a heavy handed super-featherweight. Whitaker kept his distance and popped out razor sharp jabs while Nelson forced his way forward. While Whitaker was on the move for more or less the entire fight, he stood his ground and went downstairs with bursts of punches. Even while backing up in a straight line to keep distance, Whitaker scored beautifully. Their was a moment during the fight when Whitaker moved back in a straight line and cracked three jabs in succession right threw Nelson's guard. Awareness and anticipation are crucial for any defensive master. One of the early rounds. Whitaker backed himself into a corner near the ropes, and he seemed to programme Nelson's next moves into his mind. He ducked a few inches, sagged into ropes, and covered up and protected himself with his gloves. Miliseconds later, Nelson's volley of punches never scored. Most missed the target, with Whitaker blocking the last punch.

Quite simply pure defensive boxing at its very best.


An artist

[jackiebrown]

he also scored with a behind the back punch which was not damageing but it was slick and prolly hurt nelsons spirit a bit

[salsanchezfan]

This was the fight that convinced me (finally; I didn't want to believe it) that Whitaker wasn't going to be beaten any time soon. Complete mastery.

Not a great action fight, if that's what you mean. Pretty one-sided, and only Whitaker landed anything. I gave Nelson only one round, the 11th, as I recall.

[apollack]

Whitaker mostly in control, although Azumah put in a game effort. But whitaker was simply too damn good at that point with his head movement, angles, footwork, quick punches and solid condition.

[fists of fury]

Azumah Nelson on Pernell Whitaker - "What can I say? He's a great fighter."

[achillesthegreat]

Whitaker was poetry in motion.

[Robot16]

Thanks everyone.

[TBooze]

I got the impression Azumah was only there for the paid day and did not think he could win....

Although I should give him the benefit of the doubt and Whitaker, if drug free was rather brilliant at that time.

[sweet_scientist]

I got the impression Azumah was only there for the paid day and did not think he could win....

Although I should give him the benefit of the doubt and Whitaker, if drug free was rather brilliant at that time.
Azumah Nelson was talking at the time about moving up and fighting welterweights, he was one of the MOST confident fighters ever. I think he did believe he could win, and he pressed incredibly hard in the second half of the fight in particular, having Whitaker retreat more than what the likes of Chavez had him retreat. It's not like he gave up once he saw he was overmatched.

As for the drug thing, I've yet to see a credible report which suggests that cocaine or crack is performance enhancing.

[TBooze]

Azumah Nelson was talking at the time about moving up and fighting welterweights, he was one of the MOST confident fighters ever. I think he did believe he could win, and he pressed incredibly hard in the second half of the fight in particular, having Whitaker retreat more than what the likes of Chavez had him retreat. It's not like he gave up once he saw he was overmatched.

As for the drug thing, I've yet to see a credible report which suggests that cocaine or crack is performance enhancing.

Like I said, Nelson just seemed to me to go though the motions, and I hope Whitaker was not on drugs then, because if it is shown he was, it is a massive black eye for his career.

[Robbi]

Like I said, Nelson just seemed to me to go though the motions, and I hope Whitaker was not on drugs then, because if it is shown he was, it is a massive black eye for his career.

I believe Whitaker got into coke in a serious way between 1997 and 1999, and after of course. It wasn't until he fought Trinidad that he looked shot. He was past his prime the night he fought De La Hoya, but was nowhere near shot.

When he was up against Trinidad, he stood and fought flat-footed with a murderous puncher. He never had any option because his co-ordination and reflexes had clearly evaporated.

Why did he look very good sharing a ring with De La Hoya fighting his normal kind of slick defensive fight, then in the next fight went against his own textbook and fought Trinidad wrecklessly and looked a shadow of himself?. Inactivity, serious coke abuse, and he had aged by another 2 years.

[buzzsaw]

A peak Sweat Pea made a great fighter in Nelson look so average that you just knew there was nothing Azumah was going to be able to do as Pernell pasted him rd after rd. Whitaker was on a roll during this stretch of his career and it was if he was untouchable. I recall in the later rds of the Whitaker vs Haugen fight, Greg Haughen standing in his corner trying to lure Pea into “his fight” by shouting “Pus_ _!” “Pus_ _!” and Pea was just smiling back in total control, oh man so funny!

[Robot16]

So where do you rate azumah before this fight?
A credible challenge?

[JohnThomas1]

I believe Whitaker got into coke in a serious way between 1997 and 1999, and after of course. It wasn't until he fought Trinidad that he looked shot. He was past his prime the night he fought De La Hoya, but was nowhere near shot.

When he was up against Trinidad, he stood and fought flat-footed with a murderous puncher. He never had any option because his co-ordination and reflexes had clearly evaporated.

Why did he look very good sharing a ring with De La Hoya fighting his normal kind of slick defensive fight, then in the next fight went against his own textbook and fought Trinidad wrecklessly and looked a shadow of himself?. Inactivity, serious coke abuse, and he had aged by another 2 years.

Fair post, Pryor and Chandler lost "it" almost overnight and where heavily involved with coke.

[Robbi]

Fair post, Pryor and Chandler lost "it" almost overnight and where heavily involved with coke.


Leonard was taking lines of powder up his nose after he retired with the detached retina in 1982, and probably after the Howard fight as well no doubt.

[sweet_scientist]

I believe Whitaker got into coke in a serious way between 1997 and 1999, and after of course. It wasn't until he fought Trinidad that he looked shot. He was past his prime the night he fought De La Hoya, but was nowhere near shot.

When he was up against Trinidad, he stood and fought flat-footed with a murderous puncher. He never had any option because his co-ordination and reflexes had clearly evaporated.

Why did he look very good sharing a ring with De La Hoya fighting his normal kind of slick defensive fight, then in the next fight went against his own textbook and fought Trinidad wrecklessly and looked a shadow of himself?. Inactivity, serious coke abuse, and he had aged by another 2 years.

I'd say Pernell was sporadically dipping into the bag pretty much from the start, but he only became a serious user around 95-96. That was the period when he really dropped off. He looked absolutely horrible against Hurtado and Rivera, and though some of that was due to age and not training enough, you could tell that he lost something there. I think he got himself into great shape for the DLH fight, and really trained hard, getting the best (of what he had left) out of himself for one more fight. Then as you say, inactivity and coke abuse saw him have to enter drug rehab before he got to Tito. He actually nearly died from overdosing after his last fight. Did you hear the 911 call that his chick made when he OD'ed?

[Robbi]

I'd say Pernell was sporadically dipping into the bag pretty much from the start, but he only became a serious user around 95-96. That was the period when he really dropped off. He looked absolutely horrible against Hurtado and Rivera, and though some of that was due to age and not training enough, you could tell that he lost something there. I think he got himself into great shape for the DLH fight, and really trained hard, getting the best (of what he had left) out of himself for one more fight. Then as you say, inactivity and coke abuse saw him have to enter drug rehab before he got to Tito. He actually nearly died from overdosing after his last fight. Did you hear the 911 call that his chick made when he OD'ed?

Im not too sure about 95/96. I might be wrong. But not sure Whitaker would have been taking coke around that time as he was fairy active around then, more so 1995. Surely he must have been randomly tested during that period. Very risky indeed for any boxer stepping into the ring to make money and gain glory. I don't know the concrete facts, probably only Whitaker himself knows what periods of his life he was coke active. My gut feeling is that he began taking coke after the De La Hoya fight.


In no way am I saying your wrong, just that none of us have hard evidence to support our views.

[sweet_scientist]

Im not too sure about 95/96. I might be wrong. But not sure Whitaker would have been taking coke around that time as he was fairy active around then, more so 1995. Surely he must have been randomly tested during that period. Very risky indeed for any boxer stepping into the ring to make money and gain glory. I don't know the concrete facts, probably only Whitaker himself knows what periods of his life he was coke active. My gut feeling is that he began taking coke after the De La Hoya fight.


In no way am I saying your wrong, just that none of us have hard evidence to support our views.

Sure, but don't forget that coke only stays in your system for about a day.

[Robbi]

Sure, but don't forget that coke only stays in your system for about a day.

Cocaine when urine tested 2-4 days.

[sweet_scientist]

Cocaine when urine tested 2-4 days.

Actually you're right, and maybe even longer for serious users...

[TBooze]

So where do you rate azumah before this fight?
A credible challenge?

Nelson was very respected, but it was thought he was past his best. But he would show in the 90s there was a lot left of Azumah Nelson.

[Robot16]

ok thanks for the info and reply's everyone.
Yeh i have got the oscar and sweet pea fight just havnt had time to watch it.

[sweet_scientist]

When you take a hair and analyse that you can say if the guy took coke a year ago. That cost a soccer trainer his job over here.

If they used that test on boxers I'm pretty sure we'd lose a large chunk of the sport's talent through suspension. Plenty of boxers would recreationally dabble in it here and there.

[Robbi]

When you take a hair and analyse that you can say if the guy took coke a year ago. That cost a soccer trainer his job over here.

90 days, not a year.

[Holmes' Jab]

Here ya go champ, witness the masterclass from the master.

Part I

MLgYA--Tvow


Part II

wH0NNfM7myk

Cheers for posting the footage, mate. I haven't seen that Whitaker fight for a good while actually, so will prob end up rejoging the memory later on and watch it again.

From what I can remember last time I scored it (which was a couple of years back) I only gave Nelson two rounds or something, even that might have been generous. :think

[Ezzard]

It was a safe fight for Whittaker. Nelson was a great Feather who lost his power and speed at 135. The fight was also a bad match for Nelson. he had too many physical disadvantages and Whittaker's style made it hell for Azumah.

To beat Whittaker you need to either be a defensive master yourself (Gans); be a non-stop punching machine (Duran); or be a mini Hearns (Williams) and even then it's always going to be a close fight.

[Robbi]

It was a safe fight for Whittaker. Nelson was a great Feather who lost his power and speed at 135. The fight was also a bad match for Nelson. he had too many physical disadvantages and Whittaker's style made it hell for Azumah.

To beat Whittaker you need to either be a defensive master yourself (Gans); be a non-stop punching machine (Duran); or be a mini Hearns (Williams) and even then it's always going to be a close fight.

Whitaker and Nelson were physically like fighters from the same division when they shared a ring. Also Nelson's capabilities in power and speed at lightweight were unknown, as his fight with Whitaker was his first at the weight.

[JohnThomas1]

A great big man always beats a great little one they say. That's what happened, as Ezzard alludes to.

[Robbi]

A great big man always beats a great little one they say. That's what happened, as Ezzard alludes to.

JT. Watch the video clip above, they look the same size. Nelson taller, but overall body mass even. Neck, shoulders, waist, legs, etc.

Just because Nelson was moving up, it makes everyone think that on the night he was the smaller man, when he clearly wasn't. If anyone watched that fight without knowing anything about boxing they would not come to the conclusion Nelson was the "smaller" man.

"A great big man always beats a great little one". Most of the time. But I would not use that phrase for Whitaker beating Nelson.

Nothing to do with being a Whitaker fan, hence the avatar.

[Mantequilla]

Nelson did look strong as hell and perfectly comfortable at the weight against Whitaker.

he was just never in Whitaker's class even at his very best.

[JohnThomas1]

JT. Watch the video clip above, they look the same size. Nelson taller, but overall body mass even. Neck, shoulders, waist, legs, etc.

Just because Nelson was moving up, it makes everyone think that on the night he was the smaller man, when he clearly wasn't. If anyone watched that fight without knowing anything about boxing they would not come to the conclusion Nelson was the "smaller" man.

"A great big man always beats a great little one". Most of the time. But I would not use that phrase for Whitaker beating Nelson.

Nothing to do with being a Whitaker fan, hence the avatar.

You guys both miss the point, Nelson was never a natural lightweight, not at all. Both weighing 135 fight night means nothing in the context of my statement, which has long been boxing lore. Sanchez - Gomez, Gomez - Zarate, Arguello - Pryor, Spinks - Tyson, Charles - Marciano, the list is endless.

[JohnThomas1]

Usually that saying applies to stuff like Bowe/Holyfield. It wasn't that they weighed the same in Nelson and Whitaker's case, it was that they were clearly the same size. Would you say Whitaker was bigger than Duran just because Duran started at 118? Watch them fight, they're the same size.

Well you still don't quite follow but i'll leave it at that

:good