I was reading about Whitaker and he talked about Floyd. He said, "He is good. He has skills, but he is no Pernell Whitaker."

Do you guys believe this to be true? I think Whitaker would dominate Mayweather and win a 8-4 or better decision. Mayweather never truly beat any greats at 147, nor was he really tested. Whitaker had that tremendous performance against Chavez which was ruled a draw. He also had a few uneven performances at the end of his career at 147 when he was delving into cocaine.

The Whitaker from Chavez and before beats Mayweather easily. The Whitaker post-cokehead probably gets his ass beat pretty badly.

Why easily?

I think Mayweather was a shade faster with his hands than Pernell was and Whitaker`s punches were a little wider. They both had terrific defenses and this fight would be hard to watch.

Overall I like Mayweather`s skills over Whitaker`s though Pernell had more of a desire to be great maybe more heart...cant say for sure. Mayweather`s heart wasnt tested that much. We didnt really know how much heart Pea had until Tito wrecked him.

I remember Pea was on ESPNEWS last year when he got inducted into the HOF, the host was asking him how he would do against Duran (to which he replied humbly, I'd be the underdog, but I'd never count myself out, either way, it's a great fight) and Mayweather. When the guy asked him how he would do against Mayweather, Pea looked at him incredulously and said, roughly, "How would I do against Floyd? The question should be, how would Floyd do against me. I dunno, I'd probably let him carry my bags to the gym, I guess." I was rolling.

Anyway, I like Pea. Like ETM said, we don't know how Mayweather at 147 would react to adversity, while we saw old Pea absolutely bring the beast out at times when he absolutely had to, like the Hurtado fight. He also fought much better competition over a more consistent period. So for sure, Pea has the advantage in heart and will.

Mayweather is bigger and longer than Pea though and just as fast, if not faster, but I'm curious how well he would do against a legitimate master of mindgames like Whitaker. Southpaws seem to be tricker for Mayweather and quite simply, there may have been no better southpaw than Pernell Whitaker.

So I take Pea by close, tactical decision, 115-113 or 116-112. If there's anyone who would land on Mayweather, it would most definitely be Pea, though it wouldn't exactly be anything earth-rattling, that's for sure.

Hidden classic Pernell Whitaker on the rise in the lightweight division against a guy and experianced Uncle.

Pea/Uncle

Pernell pulls his trunks down so Uncle decks him.

Pernell threw more punches, a lot more. In a fight where both guys would miss more than they landed whitaker's activity combined with his superior jab leads him to a close decision win. There wouldn't be anything easy about it. Floyd's lead right would have the potential to generate flash knockdowns.

Actually I take that back this would probably be a fun fight to watch these guys match skills but also they both are winners so the comeptitive fire would be there.

Whitaker showed enough heart against Hurtado for two careers.

This could be a boring fight in terms of action. However, I don't alway need action packed fight to get excited. To me, it's more about the magnitude and meaning of the match up. From those respect, I think tis matchup will be exciting no matter if they trade 10 punches per round or 100 punches. I'm just curious what tactics they would use to penetrate each other's defense.

It's a close fight, be it at Light or Welterweight, but Whitaker edges him (& I do mean, 'edges.') If Whitaker truly believes he's as far ahead of a peak Mayweather as his words seem to intimate, he should get off the coke.

Mayweather is a straighter puncher, a harder hitter, &, for mine, quicker with his hands, to boot. Where Whitaker's advantages will lie are in his less conventional defense (Mayweather, as brilliant a defensive fighter as he rightly is, is so in the conventional manner. Whitaker's moves made your head spin, & the southpaw stance is, IMO another advantage.)

Whitaker surely faced superior opposition, which doesn't hurt his claim, either. I like Whitaker over Duran at Lightweight, too, incidentally. This, though, at any weight, is tight, tactical, &, IMO, exciting, no matter what the knockout-craving, beer-swilling masses may argue.

Whitaker is a southpaw and Mayweather seems to have certain difficulties dealing with them.

you'd have a fight with both guys waiting to counterpunch and missing everything. shit, there probably wouldn't be 30 punches landed all together the whole fight. the fans would be bored, the ref would fake an injury just to get out of it and the judges would be sleep. having said that, i think sweet pea ducks more punches than floyd and wins by a point in a bout with a lot of even rounds.

When did Whitaker wait to counter punch? He was more a lead fighter.

against dlh, after he got tagged against tito, spots in the hurtado fight(ok ok,i know he was older in those fights) being that floyd would be bigger, hits harder, and is just as good defensively, i don't think sweet pea would be stalking him around the ring like he did jake rodriguez. but hey, maybe he'd shock us.

I wouldn't be surprised if these two had more of a mix up than people think at one point. As the rounds pass and they realize not much separates them on a round by round basis and what happens sometimes is one of them takes the fight to another plane trying to distinguish himself there and the other guy responds in the same manner.

K X P

That's what separates the two, thus far. Whitaker would do everything he could to win if the fight was in doubt. There was a beast inside Pea that I haven't seen from Mayweather.

And that would play into Money's advantage, imo.

Whoever plays the role of aggressor most likely loses. Whitaker would have a chance with that style. Not Floyd, imo

He wasn't a counter puncher Rudy. He was a come forward fighter that wrecked the body, all the way back to his amateur days. Whitaker was certainly capable of counter punching, but it wasn't his preference.

He threw about 150 more punches than Oscar did. How was he sitting back and waiting? Is that possible?

He was walking straight into Tito's shit all night and he hunted Hurtado down and KHTFO.

Mayweather really has not had a fighter force him to bring the beast out in him per se. JLC pushed him and he did what he needed to to but standing and trading with JLC would not have been a great option. Id say Hatton brought it out in him a bit. Ricky swarmed him, tried to rough him up etc and caught a beating int he second half of the fight for it. If floyd fights shane we will probally see a part of floyd we have not seen if Floyd is to stay undefeated. Cause Shane is not going to stop coming and i dont think floyd can hurt shane

I just cannot see Pernell losing to Floyd. Although i admit it may be one of those "because hes from back in the day he seemed tougher kinda things"..........Pea just seemed a little badder in the ring than Floyd.

The way he would so quickly duck and throw that wide left hook, throw two straight punches down the pipe then roll, all the while setting up that left again, WHILE STILL staying attacking the body with perfectly accurate shots to the top of the hip/ lower stomach.

I know Floyd is really good, but Pernell got shit done. For everyone saying it would be an ugly fight, it probably would. But you never know. Floyd is a master at making adjustments to people midfight, but Pernell could frustrate people JUST like Floyd. Only Pernell stayed much more into the body than Floyd did. I could see him showing us something weve never seen before in that Floyd would have to focus more on covering his bruised hips and lower stomach up after about 5 or 6.


I say Pea but not by much. SD.

The only thing I can say for sure is that it would be a great exhibition of boxing skills on both sides. Slipping, countering, rolling, pinpoint punching. It would be a sight.

Whitaker was on coke right thru his olympic days, it means nothing. Just shows what a great fighter Pernell was

I don't think either fighter wins this "easily."

I keep thinking Whitaker's defense was better but I don't know if that's just because his moves just looked so much more impressive. I definitely think he would be the aggressor in this fight, and while that would create openings for Floyd, it would also score Pea points for activity.

One thing, I think Floyd would've had some success with his straight right hand.

I guess I'll wait to see Floyd fight Shane or the winner of Pac-Cotto before making any proclamations here.

I just think PBF has the edge at 147.

He sure landed at will on Roger.

At 147 I would give a slight edge to Mayweather, he seemed to carry a bit more power and is clearly much faster. If Buddy McGirt was able to land a couple of shots on Pernell then so would Floyd.

Whitaker would have the best jab Mayweather would have ever faced, and if Pernell could force Floyd to be the aggressor then Whitaker could definitely outbox him.

I would pick Floyd in a 7-5 type fight, but it wouldn't be clear.

Now, if we are talking about a fight at 135, I would pick Pernell in a 8-4 type fight.

Why would Whitaker want Floyd to be the aggressor? It's like people have these notions of how Whitaker fought and they just aren't close to the truth. Pea would press the pace, because that's what he did.

Sitting back and letting mayweather throw 35 or 40 punches a round would be a horrible decision. Whitaker throws his usual 60 or 70 shots a round and outworks him.

Floyd hits harder than Sweet Pea and he's faster. This would be a bit like the the Mosley fight. Sugar Shane was fast too, but whats the use of his throwing three punches when he gets hit right back with five. Also Delahoya beat Sweet Pea at welterweight. Floyd beat Delahoya (easily) at super welter. There you go.

Floyd isn't faster & Delahoya never beat Whitaker. You obviously haven't had the privlege of watching a lot of Whitaker. Trust me, Boxrec wont tell you the whole tale. He was nothing like Mosley.

Also, is it your contention that an old Oscar was better at 54 than a young one was at 47? That's certainly an interesting take. Agreed that Floyd beat him easily, so did Whitaker and Pea beat a better version when he was past his prime.

So as far as the DLH fights, advantage Whitaker. There you go.

Um, I believe Oscar was the one who took Whitaker's title. They fought and he won right?

He got the decision, he didn't earn shit. the judges said mayweather/Floyd was a razor close spilt decision and you said it was easy. You're not bound to bullshit decisions.

Have you seen the fight?

Edit: LOL, I meant Mayweather/Oscar. The point remains the same. Even if you thought Oscar beat Pea, it's a joke to compare an over the hill Whitaker against a prime DLH to an over the hill Oscar against Floyd.

De La Hoya fought Whitaker pretty good for a guy with only one hand (the wrong one when facing a southpaw).

He got schooled

got schooled bad but judging from the scoring, you'd swear he beat the life out of whitaker.

I watched that fight again a couple of years ago and I don't really understand how that fight was scored for DLH.

always thought it was more lopsided than Whitaker-Chavez, which I had 8-4 or 7-5.

it's funny that someone thinks Whitaker-Mayweather would look like the Mosley fight

I don't ever really remember Whitaker being the one to move forward, he has just to get some shots off and force the opponent to retaliate.

Last time I remember Pernell being the aggressor moving forward, he was chasing Hurtado around the ring, he works better off of his back foot. And he does throw more punches then Mayweather, but 75% of those punches is his jab, one of the best jabs of all-time.

Go back and watch his Lightweight fights, he was a punching machine. I don't look at these things regularly and I'm sure they have changed a bit. But a few years back Whitaker had several spots on the top 10 of combubox punches landed. Other than Nelson, I can't really think of a fight where he wasn't moving forward.

Hurtado he was going for the kill, I wasn't implying that he was a seek and destroy fighter like Tyson. But he most certainly wasn't a counter puncher by nature. He was the aggressor against Tito if you want something past the Hurtado fight.

Jab was certainly a big weapon, not sure what that has to do with moving forward or backward. He was also a relentless body puncher, that goes back to his Amateur days. Always pounding the body and he wasn't shy with his cross either.

Whitaker would move and use his legs defensivley in his earlier Pro years. After awhile with Benton he stood in the pocket and slipped shots and was right there in postion to punch.

The Rafael Pinada fight is a good example. Pinada was very strong and had just won the title with a one punch KO of Roger Mayweather. Whitaker took the fight right to him.

Yes I've seen the fight. According to boxrec the scoring was judge: Chuck Giampa 111-115 | judge: Jerry Roth 110-116 | judge: Dalby Shirley 110-116 ~

All three judges basically had Oscar winning eight rounds to four. Nothing controversial about that.

Pernell did get robbed against JCChavez when corrupt WBC judges scored a clear Whitaker win a draw to preserve their guy Chavez's undefeated record.

If you saw the fight, why quoting the judges? When I said it was a horrible decision what part of that made you feel the need to go back to Boxrec? It most certainly was controversial and reciting putrid scorecards doesn't make them better. According to Boxrec, Mayweather vs Oscar was close and controversial. Look it up yourself, very disputed scoring.

Whitaker beat Oscar every bit as easily as he beat Chavez. Of course, this doesn't answer the question of why you think a past his prime Whitaker vs a prime Oscar is comparable to a prime Mayweather vs a past his prime Oscar.

I remember his Lightweight fights pretty well, and his early fight with Roger Mayweather had plenty of action, but he still remained the boxer. Against Greg Haugen he stood his ground with his jab and just outclassed him with combinations and side steps. Against Nazario he ended it in the first round with a jab and straight left, but in the Ramirez fight he was moving backwards plenty, but he also let his hands go plenty to.

I get your point that he wasn't a seek and destroy guy, and I wouldn't call him just a counter puncher, I considered him a pure boxer that did his best work when his opponents followed him and stood in front of him while they would run into his punches.

At Lightweight he was unbelievable, and I would pick him against Mayweather, but at Welterweight I would give Mayweather a slight edge.

We just totally disagree, I think his worst performances came when guys were chasing after him. He was at his best leading imo. Not even close. Wasn't really about who anyone was picking. I'm just reading that Pea was a counterpuncher and to be blunt, that's just wrong.

Well, I didn't call him a counter-puncher either, he can counter-punch, but he wasn't just a pure counter puncher.

I don't know, I liked his performance against Azumah Nelson, and he was moving in a circle at the same time moving his head and catching Nelson coming in.

I don't even think we are disagreeing too much, a fighter can move backwards while still being the first to punch. I agree that Pernell was usually leading, but he was also leading while his opponent was moving forward.

He could do everything, I thought the Nelson fight was lackluster by his standards. The last statement doesn't even make sense to me. He always stood his ground, very few fighters backed Pea up at all. He was a lead fighter, doesn't need to get anymore complex than that. Our biggest disagreement is you saying Whitaker didn't move forward. That's what he did in just about every fight he had.

Sweet Pea would school the Mayweather on boxing 101. Mayweather is good but he no Pernell Whitaker.

I guess we are going to have to disagree then. You can use lateral movement and still be the first to throw a punch, I don't know how that doesn't make sense.

Because it doesn't apply to the majority of Whitaker's rounds. You're talking like he danced around the ring like Ali or Holmes. He would do it at times, more often he was right in his opponents grill.

You must be recalling too many of your Fight Night victories.

I always thought of Whitaker as a guy who stood in the pocket and still didn't get hit. He was slick but wasn't really a dramatic mover or dancer.

Usually by the mid portion of his fights he was the one walking down the opponent. If they were initially aggressive, by the time they got hit 2344325 times they usually started to back off.

Getting to the Whitaker/Mayweather mythical match-up, I don't think it gets much better than this. I'll pick Sweet Pea by UD, but I think it's a hell of a fight.

Okay, I never said that. Against Cardona, DeLaHoya, Pineda, Nelson, Ramirez, Haugen, Lomeli I wouldn't call him the guy coming forward.

We saw two different things I guess.

Pea circled and stayed in range to punch. I was ringside for his fight against Paez and his ring generalship was evident. He was giving ground but kept moving his hands.