Salvador Sanchez V Whitaker..135lbs

walshb · Post by **walshb** » 09 Nov 2006, 12:41

The best Pea at Lightweight V Sanchez had he moved up. He was just as big at 5 feet 7, so Pea I don't think would be stronger, quicker and cuter yes, but ASanchez wouldn't have been easy to beat, he was that good. Who wins?

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 09 Nov 2006, 13:01

walshb wrote:The best Pea at Lightweight V Sanchez had he moved up. He was just as big at 5 feet 7, so Pea I don't think would be stronger, quicker and cuter yes, but ASanchez wouldn't have been easy to beat, he was that good. Who wins?

He would have been very easy for Whittaker to beat.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 09 Nov 2006, 13:07

sanchez worked opponents out over the course of a fight and adjusted his timing but Pernell would be too much of a puzzle. SDanchez was great and could have won one after maybe a meeting or two, maybe. This requires him learning over many rounds.

Whittaker was almost untouchable though. in his prime I struggle to remember him being in a competitive fight. I can see a Duran winning but this is not a definite win for Roberto. Stylewise I think a lightweight Tommy Hearns would be Whittaker's nemesis.

walshb · Post by **walshb** » 09 Nov 2006, 13:49

Yeah, Pea was a deceptively tricky and tough customer. One of the very best at fighting on the way back and quite a cumulative puncher. He threw a lot of leather and was hard to nail consecutively and had a decent punch. Sal would probably lose, but I wouldn't be surprised if he did after a while figure Pea out to win.

Duran I feel is too much even for Pea. Too rough, tough, busy, defensive, strong and aggressive and a very hard guy to hit. He's like Pea but that bit better in all areas.

cubedrum · Post by **cubedrum** » 09 Nov 2006, 15:00

walshb wrote:Yeah, Pea was a deceptively tricky and tough customer. One of the very best at fighting on the way back and quite a cumulative puncher. He threw a lot of leather and was hard to nail consecutively and had a decent punch. Sal would probably lose, but I wouldn't be surprised if he did after a while figure Pea out to win.

Duran I feel is too much even for Pea. Too rough, tough, busy, defensive, strong and aggressive and a very hard guy to hit. He's like Pea but that bit better in all areas.

I have to disagree. Duran showed that he could be frustrated and mentally out toughed against DeJesus (he was so shook up he cried after this one) and of course Leonard 2. Whitaker would have just the right combination of defense and speed. Duran probably would have hit him low though. Maybe a nasty foul could knock Sweet pea off his game, but I think Whitaker takes it.
Oh yeah Duran beats Sanchez.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 09 Nov 2006, 15:04

cubedrum wrote:
walshb wrote:Yeah, Pea was a deceptively tricky and tough customer. One of the very best at fighting on the way back and quite a cumulative puncher. He threw a lot of leather and was hard to nail consecutively and had a decent punch. Sal would probably lose, but I wouldn't be surprised if he did after a while figure Pea out to win.

Duran I feel is too much even for Pea. Too rough, tough, busy, defensive, strong and aggressive and a very hard guy to hit. He's like Pea but that bit better in all areas.
I have to disagree. Duran showed that he could be frustrated and mentally out toughed against DeJesus (he was so shook up he cried after this one) and of course Leonard 2. Whitaker would have just the right combination of defense and speed. Duran probably would have hit him low though. Maybe a nasty foul could knock Sweet pea off his game, but I think Whitaker takes it.
Oh yeah Duran beats Sanchez.

Sounds about right. Stlyes make fights and Whittakers style would have been very tough for Duran.

DoubleM · Post by **DoubleM** » 09 Nov 2006, 15:14

The Great John L wrote:
cubedrum wrote:
walshb wrote:Yeah, Pea was a deceptively tricky and tough customer. One of the very best at fighting on the way back and quite a cumulative puncher. He threw a lot of leather and was hard to nail consecutively and had a decent punch. Sal would probably lose, but I wouldn't be surprised if he did after a while figure Pea out to win.

Duran I feel is too much even for Pea. Too rough, tough, busy, defensive, strong and aggressive and a very hard guy to hit. He's like Pea but that bit better in all areas.
I have to disagree. Duran showed that he could be frustrated and mentally out toughed against DeJesus (he was so shook up he cried after this one) and of course Leonard 2. Whitaker would have just the right combination of defense and speed. Duran probably would have hit him low though. Maybe a nasty foul could knock Sweet pea off his game, but I think Whitaker takes it.
Oh yeah Duran beats Sanchez.
Sounds about right. Stlyes make fights and Whittakers style would have been very tough for Duran.

I actually think Duran matches up very well with Whitaker.

walshb · Post by **walshb** » 09 Nov 2006, 16:30

I think the only type fighters who can beat Pea are speed demons with good defense. Pea was fast but methodically so. He wasn't like Taylor or even DLH, real greasy speed. Duran was so rough and awkward as well as fast, strong, and tough. He beat Leonard, now that takes some doing. No way Pea gets close to beating Ray.

The guys I see being nightmares for Pea are Mayweather Junior, Duran, DLH and Aaron Pryor. I think Pryor is just too strong and relentless as is Duran. Mayweather is faster, as good defensively and as strong if not stronger. A peak DLH is also faster and maybe even stronger and definitely harder hitting.

Other than these Pea is exceptional. But I wouldn't be surprised if he pulled it off against them. I make them slight slight favorites and Sanchez is a toss up!!!

vagabundo55 · Post by **vagabundo55** » 09 Nov 2006, 17:05

This topic is truly a "what if" match up. Unfortunately Sanchez passed away before he could move up in weight. How would he have matched up against Whitaker at lightweight? We'll truly never know, we have little idea, but based on styles, I do think Sanchez could trouble Whitaker. Whitaker was a defensive wiz much like Pep so i'd favor Whitaker to decision Sanchez, although it would be a close fight as Sanchez had one key ability that marks great fighters, the ability to adapt to different styles. Although sometimes he appeared to not give his fullest effort, i'm sure for someone like Whitaker, Sanchez would. As for who would beat Whitaker.. that's a very tough question. Whitaker is one of the most underrated fighters out there, personally I think he matches Pep's defensive skills, possibly even surpassing them. Whitaker can definetely hang with all the great lightweights, Sanchez can definately hang with all the great featherweights, but against lightweights.. we'll never know.

theone · Post by **theone** » 09 Nov 2006, 19:15

I agree with vagabundo55, and will even take it a step further. I truly believe Whitaker would have beaten any lightweight ever. And thats including Duran.

theone · Post by **theone** » 09 Nov 2006, 20:38

That's a bold statement. Not Ike Williams? Not Benny Leonard? Not Henry Armstrong? Not Alexis Arguello? Not Floyd Mayweather?

You got me with one Dec. Except for Armstrong, I should have said.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 10 Nov 2006, 05:18

To beat Whittaker I think you need to be able to throw a lot of leather. So a Duran or an Armstrong could beat him. These elite swarmers with decent defences and solid power could beat Whittaker. That's not to say that they would but overall I'd probably just go with them.

The other possibility is a Hearns type. Someone with speed and tremendous power. Someone who is going to be able to land enough power shots to keep Whittaker cautious. Ike Williams might be closest to this type of fighter. I don't think he'd have enough though.

The other way is to simply beat him at his own game and be a defensive mastermind and nick a close decision in a chess match. So guys like Gans, Blackburn, Mayweather and Leonard would stand a chance. one thing I'd say though is that Whittaker is more mobile than Mayweather and Gans (from what I've seen, and it's not that much) and I think this gives him an edge.

walshb · Post by **walshb** » 10 Nov 2006, 10:24

Spot on Ezzard. Whitaker though fantastic sems to be lacking something.
Ijust can't put my finger on it. He is very good in all areas and brilliant defensively, but he is not great iN terms of blazing speed, KO power or even amaging power. So a Duran and Pryor would have no fear in taking his shots and I think they would eventualy TKO him late or whenever they catch up witH him. Mayweather I feel is faster, as good defensively if not better, harder hitting and equal in any other areas. I think he wins a cose but deserved decision as would a peak DLH.

Borinken25 · Post by **Borinken25** » 10 Nov 2006, 11:34

A peak DLH lost to Whitaker and even though the scores went to DLH, I think it was a gift decision. A prime Whitaker is very and I mean very difficult to defeat because his extraordinary defense and smarts in the ring. As much as I like Sanchez I don't think he would've defeated Whitaker. Whitaker didn't need any power to defeat you, all his needed was his amazing and extraordinary boxing ability. Just take a look at his fight with Chavez which Whitaker clearly won and Chavez was a murderous puncher who couldn't do anything to Whitaker. Power against Whitaker means nothing if you couldn't hit him. IMO Whitaker wins this one close but clearly.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 10 Nov 2006, 11:39

walshb wrote:Spot on Ezzard. Whitaker though fantastic sems to be lacking something.
Ijust can't put my finger on it. He is very good in all areas and brilliant defensively, but he is not great iN terms of blazing speed, KO power or even amaging power. So a Duran and Pryor would have no fear in taking his shots and I think they would eventualy TKO him late or whenever they catch up witH him. Mayweather I feel is faster, as good defensively if not better, harder hitting and equal in any other areas. I think he wins a cose but deserved decision as would a peak DLH.

Well we follow the same path but just end up with different results. I think Whittaker gets the nod over Mayweather.

Duran and Pryor would need 15 rounds to get him but they could do it.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 10 Nov 2006, 11:42

Borinken25 wrote:A peak DLH lost to Whitaker and even though the scores went to DLH, I think it was a gift decision. A prime Whitaker is very and I mean very difficult to defeat because his extraordinary defense and smarts in the ring. As much as I like Sanchez I don't think he would've defeated Whitaker. Whitaker didn't need any power to defeat you, all his needed was his amazing and extraordinary boxing ability. Just take a look at his fight with Chavez which Whitaker clearly won and Chavez was a murderous puncher who couldn't do anything to Whitaker. Power against Whitaker means nothing if you couldn't hit him. IMO Whitaker wins this one close but clearly.

I think Chavez was a consistent puncher but he didn't have that one shot dynamite that could swing a fight round. Duran had it at 135. Chavez would beat opponents down and wear them out. He couldn't do it against Whittaker. Duran had an extra gear or two when it came to ring movement whereas Chavez kept up a more grinding pace.

walshb · Post by **walshb** » 10 Nov 2006, 11:50

Chavez was not close to Duran in overall ability. I like Chavez but he was too easy hit, slower than Duran, less mobile and easier to figure out. Chavez was also a notoriously slow starter and he was the type of fighter who would need 20 rds to beat a Whitaker. Duran had speed, power, defense, stamina and a great chin. He did everything faster and better than Pea, I can't see Pea beating him or Pryor.

I can't see Pea beating DLH who hit harder, was faster and had great boxing skills. Pea would not land easy shots on a peak DLH.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 10 Nov 2006, 11:59

walshb wrote:Chavez was not close to Duran in overall ability. I like Chavez but he was too easy hit, slower than Duran, less mobile and easier to figure out. Chavez was also a notoriously slow starter and he was the type of fighter who would need 20 rds to beat a Whitaker. Duran had speed, power, defense, stamina and a great chin. He did everything faster and better than Pea, I can't see Pea beating him or Pryor.

I can't see Pea beating DLH who hit harder, was faster and had great boxing skills. Pea would not land easy shots on a peak DLH.

I go along with teh first paragraph but I'm not sure about DLH. I think it would be a clsoe one whenever they fought.

Borinken25 · Post by **Borinken25** » 10 Nov 2006, 14:08

Ezzard and washb I do have a little problem visualizing Duran stopping Whitaker. And this is why. I do agree that Duran at lightweight did punch harder than Chavez and was faster and better boxer, but at the same time Whitaker was the type of fighter that would make a great fighter look bad. I look at the fight between Duran and Benitez and I see that extremely defensive and intelligent fighters gave Duran some problems and in my opinion Whitaker was better than Benitez. I pick Duran by decision against Whitaker but there is no way that I can see Duran stopping Whitaker or anybody else for that matter. Whitaker was an exceptional defensive wizard that was not easy to hit no matter who he fought.

elmersalsa · Post by **elmersalsa** » 10 Nov 2006, 16:31

Just by looking at the Sanchez-Nelson and Whitaker-Nelson fights, I lean to Whitaker to beat Sanchez. First, Sanchez has to go up in weight. SEcond, Whitaker beat Nelson so easily that it was not even a contest. Sanchez had all kinds of problems with a Nelson that ONLY had 12 fights!!!

Whitaker in the other hand, beat a more experienced Nelson, and in his prime. It was masterpiece of work.

When Duran fought Benitez, it was in a weight class that Duran was not even accostumed to. Plus, he was ALREADY CONSIDERED WASHED UP after the No Mas fiasco. I do not think that a Benitez would have beat that Duran in Montreal. I do not think that NOBODY would have beaten Whitaker in that UGLY NIGHT with Chavez. Whitaker was strictly WORLD CLASS!!!

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 10 Nov 2006, 17:06

elmersalsa wrote:Just by looking at the Sanchez-Nelson and Whitaker-Nelson fights, I lean to Whitaker to beat Sanchez. First, Sanchez has to go up in weight. SEcond, Whitaker beat Nelson so easily that it was not even a contest. Sanchez had all kinds of problems with a Nelson that ONLY had 12 fights!!!

Whitaker in the other hand, beat a more experienced Nelson, and in his prime. It was masterpiece of work.

When Duran fought Benitez, it was in a weight class that Duran was not even accostumed to. Plus, he was ALREADY CONSIDERED WASHED UP after the No Mas fiasco. I do not think that a Benitez would have beat that Duran in Montreal. I do not think that NOBODY would have beaten Whitaker in that UGLY NIGHT with Chavez. Whitaker was strictly WORLD CLASS!!!

You make some pertinant points, Elmersalsa. Particularly about Sanchez having to go up in weight to meet an ATG who would be fighting at his own best weight.

It's also true that Sanchez had a fair bit of trouble with a green Nelson (though he did triumph in the end and deserves kudos for that) whereas Whitaker completely dominated a more seasoned Nelson.

I think it would be too big a task for Sanchez to be able to beat a peak Whitaker at 135. He'd go the 15 round no problem but I can't see him being able to cause Pernell a great deal of trouble, certainly not enough, in my opinion, to get the nod.

Peak Whitaker vs peak Duran at 135 is a great matchup. I've already changed my opinion on the winner twice since starting this post...

DoubleM · Post by **DoubleM** » 10 Nov 2006, 17:12

Duran wasn't as straight forward a fighter as Chavez... Whitaker will not find it anywhere near as easy to predict punches coming. Duran could have problems with movers, but in all honesty, Whitaker didn't move on his feet a whole lot - definitely not a cyclist. Duran would find it easier to catch up with Whitaker than say, Benny Leonard. His feinting would give Whitaker all sorts of problems, as well as that power and general elusiveness of his own. Mainly, it would be Duran's multiple dimensions & loose, relaxed style that Chavez didn't have, which would win him the fight.

Borinken25 · Post by **Borinken25** » 10 Nov 2006, 21:19

elmersalsa wrote:Just by looking at the Sanchez-Nelson and Whitaker-Nelson fights, I lean to Whitaker to beat Sanchez. First, Sanchez has to go up in weight. SEcond, Whitaker beat Nelson so easily that it was not even a contest. Sanchez had all kinds of problems with a Nelson that ONLY had 12 fights!!!

Whitaker in the other hand, beat a more experienced Nelson, and in his prime. It was masterpiece of work.

When Duran fought Benitez, it was in a weight class that Duran was not even accostumed to. Plus, he was ALREADY CONSIDERED WASHED UP after the No Mas fiasco. I do not think that a Benitez would have beat that Duran in Montreal. I do not think that NOBODY would have beaten Whitaker in that UGLY NIGHT with Chavez. Whitaker was strictly WORLD CLASS!!!

Please elmer why don’t you give credit to Benitez. First what kind of excuse is that Duran wasn’t accustomed to that weight. If it is like that then Trinidad wasn’t accostmed to middle weight and that is why he lost to Hopkins. Nonsense. Trinidad lost because he couldn’t do anything to decipher Hopkins movement and defense and that is what happen to Duran. He was in great shape and to imply that Duran was WASHED UP is extremely absurd. Benitez was the better man that night and Duran just couldn’t do anything to decipher Benitez defense and it wouldn’t be that far-fetched to think that Whitaker could do the same thing.

DoubleM · Post by **DoubleM** » 10 Nov 2006, 21:59

Borinken25 wrote:
elmersalsa wrote:Just by looking at the Sanchez-Nelson and Whitaker-Nelson fights, I lean to Whitaker to beat Sanchez. First, Sanchez has to go up in weight. SEcond, Whitaker beat Nelson so easily that it was not even a contest. Sanchez had all kinds of problems with a Nelson that ONLY had 12 fights!!!

Whitaker in the other hand, beat a more experienced Nelson, and in his prime. It was masterpiece of work.

When Duran fought Benitez, it was in a weight class that Duran was not even accostumed to. Plus, he was ALREADY CONSIDERED WASHED UP after the No Mas fiasco. I do not think that a Benitez would have beat that Duran in Montreal. I do not think that NOBODY would have beaten Whitaker in that UGLY NIGHT with Chavez. Whitaker was strictly WORLD CLASS!!!
Please elmer why don’t you give credit to Benitez. First what kind of excuse is that Duran wasn’t accustomed to that weight. If it is like that then Trinidad wasn’t accostmed to middle weight and that is why he lost to Hopkins. Nonsense. Trinidad lost because he couldn’t do anything to decipher Hopkins movement and defense and that is what happen to Duran. He was in great shape and to imply that Duran was WASHED UP is extremely absurd. Benitez was the better man that night and Duran just couldn’t do anything to decipher Benitez defense and it wouldn’t be that far-fetched to think that Whitaker could do the same thing.

... Yep, Duran was in top shape. He was also determined to win. However - the point is, Duran was far better at lightweight.

Borinken25 · Post by **Borinken25** » 10 Nov 2006, 22:38

DoubleM wrote:
Borinken25 wrote:
elmersalsa wrote:Just by looking at the Sanchez-Nelson and Whitaker-Nelson fights, I lean to Whitaker to beat Sanchez. First, Sanchez has to go up in weight. SEcond, Whitaker beat Nelson so easily that it was not even a contest. Sanchez had all kinds of problems with a Nelson that ONLY had 12 fights!!!

Whitaker in the other hand, beat a more experienced Nelson, and in his prime. It was masterpiece of work.

When Duran fought Benitez, it was in a weight class that Duran was not even accostumed to. Plus, he was ALREADY CONSIDERED WASHED UP after the No Mas fiasco. I do not think that a Benitez would have beat that Duran in Montreal. I do not think that NOBODY would have beaten Whitaker in that UGLY NIGHT with Chavez. Whitaker was strictly WORLD CLASS!!!
Please elmer why don’t you give credit to Benitez. First what kind of excuse is that Duran wasn’t accustomed to that weight. If it is like that then Trinidad wasn’t accostmed to middle weight and that is why he lost to Hopkins. Nonsense. Trinidad lost because he couldn’t do anything to decipher Hopkins movement and defense and that is what happen to Duran. He was in great shape and to imply that Duran was WASHED UP is extremely absurd. Benitez was the better man that night and Duran just couldn’t do anything to decipher Benitez defense and it wouldn’t be that far-fetched to think that Whitaker could do the same thing.
... Yep, Duran was in top shape. He was also determined to win. However - the point is, Duran was far better at lightweight.

I do agree 100% with that statement.

Salvador Sanchez V Whitaker..135lbs

Salvador Sanchez V Whitaker..135lbs

Re: Salvador Sanchez V Whitaker..135lbs