Pernell Whitaker

[werety]

It seems on these forums that the phrase "styles make fights" does not apply to pernell whitaker. Every single time he is ever brought up in any type of mythical matchup it is always that pernell will cause his opponent stylistic trouble or just outbox him. I have never once even heard someone mention an opponent that would give Whitaker trouble stylistically so I was wondering if anyone ccould maybe mention a few people who they think would and why.

[Bad_Intentions]

2 fighters that would give pernell alot of trouble : Henry Armstrong & Sugar Ray Robinson (both at welterweight)

[enquirer]

Thomas hearns at welter would represent a stylistic nightmare for whitaker.......

[Holmes' Jab]

Hearn's would be a poor matchup for Pea. SRR, SRL and Armstrong would also have a great shout against him at WW.

[Vantage_West]

he was a jack of all trades and a master of defence...great work rate great inside fighter amazing jab. but his disadvantages were
hieght- 5'6 was alright for lightwieght and ok for light welter but after that it wasnt somthing he could out muscle guy slike he could at the other lower wieghts.
power- i am in the group that says he wasnt feather fisted as many people say it just wasnt his thing to drop bombs....why when you can dodge then throw a 5 hit combo and hurt the ribs. his left hand did have some pop though he brutalised hurtado and had created amazing counter oppertunites.
clinicaly flat footed - when you are flat-footed you can move but you can be less mobile and not dance as others with his speed and abilty.

but yet thinking about it all of those disadvantges were his advantages aswell.

hieght - at welter he was mcuh smaller and used it to move and slip far more agile than others he could duck and really bend low.

power - becuase he had not as much pop as you would want it changed him into a pure boxer...if you have alot of power then you become a puncher and thus not become a hooker...which can in later years be a way of get out of fights like tito he was a boxer puncher then...wham he only has a left hook to his name and that is easy to pick off.

flat footed - when guys get on there feet it's usually a sign they have been hurt or just trying to not trade with them...becuase he couldnt toe bounce he had to adapt to this and would be in the pocket doging and blocking or on the outside picking his man off.

persoanlly i dont think anyone has an easy time but he was liable to be hit and could get dropped but that was in his later career not in his prime.

leonard:could try the 40 punches at the end of the round buit pernell was so agile i dont think leonard would look good doing it.he doesnt have the size stlye becuase ina defencive fight it goes to the most defencive and pernell wins that by a mile.

robinson: talking about the welter robinson not the middlewieght robinson who even when years out of his prime could still win titles but lose to not ideal compition.
at welter he is just too aggresive but accurate to notand could definatly outmuscle and outhustle whitaker.

tommy hearns: too tall to quick to dangerous for whitaker. you had to be able to hit hearns with powerpunches and able to get in on the inside and bomb him out. like hagler and barkley and leoanrd they got inside and punched for all mercy.which is why whitaker i dont think can win but still not get embarresed or look bad but just not win.

[PowerPuncher]

He was so complete with so little flaws, hence he didnt suffer from stylistic problems as much. But:

Hearns - the jab, speed and accuracy and reach would have been a stylistic problem

Robinson - aggression, speed, power, precision and combinations - tough style match

Leonard - see above

And thats basically because they could potentially beat him because of their greatness not because Whitaker was floored

Whitaker matches up well against:

Duran,
Benitez
Armstrong
Tyszu

Floyd Mayweather is a close 1 I'd pick him over.

[TBooze]

Hearn's would be a poor matchup for Pea. SRR, SRL and Armstrong would also have a great shout against him at WW.

Whitaker's chin was on the soft side of average, and Hearns was damn accurate at 147lbs with his left and if he landed that right properly it would be goodnight Sweet Pea.

Hearns would hit prime 147lbs Whitaker more times than he was used to and that would upset Whitaker's style IMO, and even if Sweet Pea avoided the straight right, Hearns would do enough to win a close fight.

Hearns WU15 9-6/8-7

[PowerPuncher]

Whitaker's chin was on the soft side of average, and Hearns was damn accurate at 147lbs with his left and if he landed that right properly it would be goodnight Sweet Pea.

Hearns would hit prime 147lbs Whitaker more times than he was used to and that would upset Whitaker's style IMO, and even if Sweet Pea avoided the straight right, Hearns would do enough to win a close fight.

Hearns WU15 9-6/8-7

Soft side of average? Harsh he took Delahoya and Trinidads best well past his prime

Agree Hearns wins

[TBooze]

Soft side of average? Harsh he took Delahoya and Trinidads best well past his prime

Agree Hearns wins

Mayweather caught him nicely so did Vazquez; IMO his brilliant defence helped hide the weakness in his chin, hell even Gary Jacobs had him going.;)

[Robbi]

Mayweather caught him nicely so did Vazquez; IMO his brilliant defence helped hide the weakness in his chin, hell even Gary Jacobs had him going.;)

Liar. I have this fight on video and watched it a couple of months ago. Jacobs never had Whitaker anywhere near going. Outright lying.

[Mantequilla]

Whitaker was a pure boxer, not a complete fighter.

he has more or less the same stylistic weaknesses as most other top level pure boxers.

Swarmers, top level boxer punchers that are good enough defensively to make him miss a lot and have better offense, etc.

[TBooze]

Liar. I have this fight on video and watched it a couple of months ago. Jacobs never had Whitaker anywhere near going. Outright lying.

Jacobs decked Whitaker in the 11th;)

[Robbi]

Jacobs decked Whitaker in the 11th;)

That was no knockdown, and he never had him going from it anyway. Thats the main part of my arguement.

[TBooze]

That was no knockdown, and he never had him going from it anyway. Thats the main part of my arguement.

There was a knockdown, and thus Jacobs had Whitaker going; but Sweet Pea had Jacobs going big time in the 12th, and do not worry, Whitaker won fair and square in the end.;)

[werety]

So you guys cant see anyone beating Whitaker at lightweight ? Duran maybe? I see prime duran against Whitaker as a 50/50 fight personally but thats just me.

[brownpimp88]

Whitaker was a pure boxer, not a complete fighter.

he has more or less the same stylistic weaknesses as most other top level pure boxers.

Swarmers, top level boxer punchers that are good enough defensively to make him miss a lot and have better offense, etc.
Chavez, Nelson,ramirez, Vazquez, Paez were all swarmers and Pernell beat all of these guys. I believe Mcgirt was a boxer-puncher.

[PowerPuncher]

Hurtado was a pretty bad style match up, he needed a last ditch KO to win that 1. But Whitaker may have been past prime or taking Hurtado lightly

[brooklyn1550]

2 fighters that would give pernell alot of trouble : Henry Armstrong & Sugar Ray Robinson (both at welterweight)

Don't forget the Hitman

[Robbi]

Soft side of average? You have a lot of historical knowledge, but very little analytical knowledge. He had a very good chin, and an even better will.

Whitaker's knockdowns were caused by his awkward style, usually crouching down low towards the canvas. Technically scored as knockdowns, but you could hardly question his punch resistance with those type of knockdowns.

[TBooze]

Mayweather rocked him briefly, Vasquez didn't. Whitaker was doing his squat down thing against the ropes and was as much off balance as the shot put him down. The Jacobs thing is BS, and you know it. You seem to know a lot of the stuff you spout is BS, yet you say it anyway.

Hey I am Mr Pedant;)

[ripcity]

Somthing that has to be consedered. Thwe two bigest advantages a boxer can have is reach and the ability to use it. If I can hit you and you can't hit me I have a huge advantage. The other is speed and agility. If I have speed and agility I can make you miss close the distance and land quick punches. Speed and agility alsooften negates power. Timing is the best counter to speed and agility but speed and agility usuly wins.
Whitaker was one of the best speed and agility boxers ever. There are defently boxers that could beat him. Could dose not mean would.
I think some good match ups would be Benny Leonard (135) Ray Leonard (147) Ray Robinson (147) Thomas Hearns (147) and Henry Armstrong (135)

[Mantequilla]

Chavez, Nelson,ramirez, Vazquez, Paez were all swarmers and Pernell beat all of these guys. I believe Mcgirt was a boxer-puncher.

I didn't say he would have a tough time With ANY swarmer or boxer puncher.

Most of those fighters were slow and methodical, with the exception of Nelson.

[4Rounder]

Chavez, Nelson,ramirez, Vazquez, Paez were all swarmers and Pernell beat all of these guys. I believe Mcgirt was a boxer-puncher.
Correction, he didn't beat Chavez, who was a bit more of a boxer-puncher, and I haven't seen the Ramirez fight entirely so I can't comment there.

[brownpimp88]

Yeah, to anyone other than a Chavez nuthugger or Whitaker hater, he easily beat Chavez. There is no case for Chavez getting a draw in that fight at all, unless you simply have no idea how to score fights, which you obviously don't.
word!

[4Rounder]

Yeah, to anyone other than a Chavez nuthugger or Whitaker hater, he easily beat Chavez. There is no case for Chavez getting a draw in that fight at all, unless you simply have no idea how to score fights, which you obviously don't.
The same BS from the bullshitting pea nuthugger. :lol:
Keep dreaming fool,the fight was a draw and forever it will be, and you know why? Because it was a draw.:deal

[Asterion]

Recently I've been ranking Whitaker above Leonard in P4P lists.

[brooklyn1550]

Obviously Chavez-Whitaker will go down in the history books as a draw. But Whitaker deserved the decision.

Is there really any debating this?

[4Rounder]

Again? WHat besides this has made you think I'm too biased towards Whitaker? Name just ONE time aside from this. This is an obvious robbery we're talking about here, everyone except a total retard (4Rounder) or a troll trying to get under someon'e skin(yourself) think otherwise. You lose.
NO, you are too biased and your man-love for Whitaker is too strong. As soon as someone doesn't say that Whitaker is the king of boxing you immediately jump on his dick and scream robbery this and that. It is beyong obvious.

The fight was a DRAW, no debate, I leave it there. :deal

[werety]

no 1 can honestly score whitaker chavez a draw. be real with urselves i dont even think it was close and if u think it was a draw ur kidding urself. period.

[Sizzle]

I think it's pretty obvious De La Hoya caused Whitaker a load of problems.

That Whitaker was not as far removed from his best as his nuthuggers would have you believe.

[pryorgatti]

That quote sums it well: "Whatever the outcome of this fight against one of the best young fighter in the world, the 33 years old Pernell Whitaker is holding his own, it gives you an idea of how great he was in his prime". Larry Merchant.

[ripcity]

Sweet Pea may be #1 Whitaker supper fan but he is not wrong in regards to Whitaker vs. Chavez