The Best

elmersalsa · Post by **elmersalsa** » 11 Jan 2005, 16:24

Grimm wrote:
elmersalsa wrote:I pick them like this:

1. Ray Robinson
2. Henry Armstrong
3. Muhammad Ali
4. Joe Louis
5. Roberto Duran
6. Joe Gans
7. Willie Pep
8. Jack Johnson
9. Benny Leonard
10. Harry Greb
11. Sam Langford
12. Ray Leonard
13. Rocky Marciano
14. Pernell Whitaker
15. Carlos Monzon
16. Jimmy Wilde
17. Ezzard Charles
18. Archie Moore
19. Marvin Hagler
20. Jack Dempsey

This is my personal opinion.
I understand that this is your personal opinion and I can understand that................but can you make me understand why the hell pernell whitaker is on your list.

Pernell Whitaker at first I thought that he was not a top 10, nor even a top 20 all time fighter, but when I looked at his pro record, HE REALLY DID NOT LOSE A FIGHT IN HIS PRIME, AND PROBABLY DID NOT LOSE A SINGLE ROUND. These are the reasons:

1. I looked also at his fights and I realized how special this fighter was...he was very underrated in terms of popularity and action, but when it came to master defense, in his prime, HE WAS NUMBER ONE IN BOXING CLEVERNESS, PROBABLY THE MOST INTELLIGENT FIGHTER INSIDE THE RING IN THE LAST 25 YEARS.

2. He won 4 world crowns in 4 different weight classes, and at lightweight, he CLEARLY dominated his opposition, MAKING 8 TITLE DEFENSES of the lightweight crown. He even became undisputed champ at lightweight, something not done 12 years before his reign when Roberto Duran was the absolute lightweight king.

3. His quality of opposition was fairly good, but not that great as the opposition of the likes of Duran's, Benny Leonard's, Robinson's and Armstrong's to name a few, but he almost beat them all. He beat Azumah Nelson EASILY who was the jr lightweight champ. He also beat TWICE, (YES, HE BEAT TWICE) Jose Luis Ramirez who was a long time tough foe. He beat fine fighters and future Hall of Famers like Roger Mayweather and Buddy McGirt, and tough fighters like Harold Brazier, Rafael Pineda, Greg Haugen, Julio Cesar Vazquez and Jorge Paez and of course, he REALLY BEAT IN A DISASTRUOS ROBBERY the great Julio Cesar Chavez fighting Chavez' kind of fight, the way Chavez like it, and made Chavez look like an AMATEUR. He completely dominated, frustrated and anhiliated Chavez' power who at the time was 87-0, 72 KOs and considered the best in the game for 4 years. We can say it was not Chavez weight class, NEITHER WAS WHITAKER'S. NO EXCUSES.
Even though it was a draw, it was perhaps the most dominating performance that I have seen in the last 25 years and maybe all time due to the circumstances (pound per pound title fight and Chavez' INVINCIBILITY)

4. Was also an UNDERRATED BODY PUNCHER and ring tactician that dominated his weight class, one of the best lightweights of all time which bring him a good historical impact

5. He had longevity, he fought for 17 years and had still besides the robberies they did against him a great record

6. Whitaker fought in 23 world title bouts in 4 weight classes. Won The Ring Fighter of the Year in 1989 and undefeated in 17 straight championship bouts if I can remember.

7. HE WAS THE BEST FIGHTER OF HIS GENERATION (THE 90s). Forget Evander Holyfield or Ricardo "Finito" Lopez. In the horrenduos night of September 10, 1993 at the Alamo Dome, Whitaker received that honor as the best of the decade against Chavez.

And that is why I ranked Sweet Pea with the all time best...By anybody's standards, Whitaker ranks among the greats. Well, that might be only my opinion.

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 11 Jan 2005, 17:01

Whitaker gets overlooked because he was a boxer with a moderate punch, he didn`t excite like the crash bang wallop of some fighters.
Boxers tend to get rated by popularity, and their popularity is usually determined by their style.
Duran makes most peoples top 10, and his best fighting weight was undoubtedly lightweight.
But would he have beaten a boxer like Whitaker, I doubt he could have, Leonard demonstrated how a smart clever boxer could frustrate him.

But then some out and out boxers do get recognition for their skill, Willy Pep, he won a round without even throwing a punch, could you see anybody giving Pernell a round for the same reason…look at his fight with Chavez.

But once again I will draw your attention to Ezzard Charles.
Go through his record and you will see he fought ALL the top fighters of that time who were brave enough to get in the ring with him.
Sure there were a couple of early defeats, but they were to very, very experienced top class fighters.
Whoever fought him early in his career and got lucky, was made to pay in the return.

Ray Robinson and Henry Armstrong both avoided a certain Mr Burley, but Ezzard fought him twice, and when Burley was on top of his game and Ezzard was quite a new comer.
Only the excellent Lloyd Marshall stopped him when he was in his prime, and was made to pay for it every time they fought after then.
He gave the Rock hell even at heavyweight.

So basically he terrorized from middle to heavy.
Don’t that make him a clear winner??

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 11 Jan 2005, 17:02

lumpymo · Post by **lumpymo** » 11 Jan 2005, 21:00

Duran makes most peoples top 10, and his best fighting weight was undoubtedly lightweight.
But would he have beaten a boxer like Whitaker, I doubt he could have, Leonard demonstrated how a smart clever boxer could frustrate him.
[/quote]

You seem to forget that when SRL fought Duran the second time that again the SRL "crew" had the deck loaded in their favour. The ring was 25 feet, the fight was rushed to make sure that Duran who is notorious for partying after fights,(and any time for that matter when he isn't fighting) would not have enough time to get himself in shape for the fight. Even when the Duran camp asked for a delay for the second fight because they new after awhile that Duran would not be in shape in time, the SRL crew said "no", and that was their whole plan to begin with and it worked. If he Duran wanted to make the huge payday that he was assured with this second fight, he would have to do everything SRL's way.
After Duran fought SRL the first time swiftness of foot was no longer in the Duran arsenal, so of course he was slower, and would not have the speed to catch these guys then. You take him back to june 20th 1980 and before, he would have caught all of them, and Whittaker would have been chewed up and spit out.

cheers M.O.

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 12 Jan 2005, 12:48

Duran had problems with the boxers, look to his record.
Opinions vary, I think he, and just about every other lightweight would have had massive problems with Whitacker.
And doesn`t almost every boxer(especially their fans) have an excuse why they lost, too big a ring/too small a ring/down to even more trivial reasons.
In a 25ft ring you are aloud to hit your opponent as many times as your opponent hits you, thats where your boxing skill helps

wsbuf · Post by **wsbuf** » 12 Jan 2005, 14:06

Alexis Arquello should be ahead of Whitaker

lumpymo · Post by **lumpymo** » 12 Jan 2005, 21:51

As I am sure you must know the larger the ring size the more room a boxer who dances (in SRL's case "runs") has to move, he can move backwards/side to side for quite awhile before he hits the ropes. Making it that much more difficult for the aggressor to close the distance.

"Look to his record" are we talking about before june 20th 1980 as I stated in my last post, because if we are which "boxer" was able to beat him, or give him trouble? Maybe last awhile in the fight, or go the distance, but that is surely it, the winner was never in doubt at the end. The one boxer/puncher who beat him, and that was a non title fight, after he already won the crown and I am sure was not up for it, and he crushed the guy in the two following fights.

With the added weight after the "brawl for it all" he was not as fleet footed as he once was, and a rabbit like SRL would take full advantage of that with getting the largest ring he possibly could, if at all possible I am sure he would have had it in a football field!

cheers M.O.

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 13 Jan 2005, 13:07

lumpymo wrote:
I am sure was not up for it,

M.O.

Come on your just making excuses for everything now..

Exempting Pep, a fighter does not win a round by not hitting the other fella.
If Leonard hit Duran it only means he himself was close enough to get hit, he did not have 9ft arms did he.

Sure the bigger ring will suit the stylist more than the brawler, but boxing is about `the manly art of self-defence`.
Prize ring rules do not apply today.

Leonard fought him in the first fight and realized he was fighting Duran’s fight, so being a clever man he changed his fight plan for the next fight, and boxed him…..and Duran did not have an answer to this, and got frustrated and quit.

Leonard may have used his legs a lot more in the 2nd fight but he also used his intelligence also.

lumpymo · Post by **lumpymo** » 13 Jan 2005, 19:07

SRL fought the fight he did in Montreal because Duran didn't give him much of a choice. As I stated before, june 20th 1980 and before Duran could have and did catch his opponents, after that date with his added weight (lets try not to forget he was a lightweight champion for 7 years)
he didn't have the spring in his step as before.

In the first fight he didn't seem to have a problem over coming those 9' long arms of SRL's. No excuses just the facts

cheers M.O.

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 14 Jan 2005, 11:31

Duran was a fantastic fighter I would never try to say any different.
But I just think he would and did have trouble with the clever boxer type like Pernel.

You say it was an age thing with him not being able to do the same in the rematch.
But who had he ever fought who could do as leonard did even when he was at lightweight?
Leonard was an exceptional boxer, he deserved the `Sugar` name.
And Whitaker not as complete as Leonard, certainly possesed the boxing skills to frustrate Duran.

lumpymo · Post by **lumpymo** » 15 Jan 2005, 05:41

We dissagree on his deserving the "sugar" name, as I also don't think Mosely deserves that nick name either. Their is only one "SUGARMAN" that deserves the name, and we all know who that is.

Ken Buchanan, Ray Lampkin, Saoul Mamby, Vilomar Fernandez, Lou Bizzarro, Edwin Viruet, these are some of the fleet footed talent that Duran faced as lightweight champion and though some lasted the distance and some into the later rounds, they all came up short.

As far as Whitaker is concerned this guy was even more afraid to mix it up than Hector Camacho was, another south paw. Both stinkers, make for real exciting fights, they almost made it look like a non fight at times, BORING!!!

SRL was not this dancing master that you seem to think he was, he was a boxer puncher, the only time he ran was when he needed to in order to stay away from certain guys. I know that he was good in that he was able to adapt, but look to his record as a pro and if you watched his fights comming up as I did you would have seen a guy who mostly sat down on his punches and didn't do alot, or any dancing (his case running) around.
He had very fast hands and a good strong punch, and a good chin, but to say he got off his game plan in the first Duran fight and thats why he lost, no, no, no, that was the way he fought and he lost at it. Any running around he tried to do, Duran cut off the ring and worked him over. Besides I never seen anyone clutch and hold so much in a fight as I seen him do in that first fight, that ref. Carlos Padilla I think was his name, screwed up big that night for sure. SRL should have been penalized for all that clutching and holding.
And like I said "after" that night Durans added weight took away his once fast feet, his ability to cut off the ring for good.

Now put that in your pipe and smoke it.

cheers M.O.

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 15 Jan 2005, 10:48

The only thing I agree with you is that Mosely oesn`t deserve the `sugar`.

Great fighters have the ability to adapt, if one plan don`t work lets try another.
If Leonard could not outpunch an opponent, then outbox him, boxing is more than brute raw power.
Leonard was a box/fighter and also had silky skills, thats why he was so good.
Pernel could be termed boring if you only appreciate the fighters raw excitment but you cannot over look he was very gifted.

Tantum · Post by **Tantum** » 15 Jan 2005, 12:16

Floyd Patterson.

KOJOE90 · Post by **KOJOE90** » 15 Jan 2005, 12:59

Tantum wrote:Floyd Patterson.

It would have been interesting to see how Pattersons career would have developed had he stayed has Light-Heavyweight for longer. Where his major flaw, his chin, would have been less of a problem.

Tantum · Post by **Tantum** » 15 Jan 2005, 13:26

Floyd got dropped easier than most heavyweight champs, but he got up off the canvas just about every time.

And while I wasn't entirely serious about Floyd being the best fighter ever...

He normally fought very timid, and was a timid person. But when he had his flashes of ferocity, he was as good as any fighter that's ever lived.

It must have been exciting watching Floyds fights live, not knowing who had already won... Because you never knew what would happen. (and while you could say that about any fighter... You know what I mean. :P )

There are a few heavyweight champs who don't get the respect they deserve, and Floyd Patterson is one of them.

lumpymo · Post by **lumpymo** » 15 Jan 2005, 14:27

You don't agree with all the clutching and holding SRL did in the first fight??? Did you see the fight, if you did how in the world could you miss it and or not agree with that ???

cheers M.O.

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 16 Jan 2005, 08:26

Tactics

Not all are good to watch but they have the desired effect, Evander`s headwork against Tyson springs to mind.

lumpymo · Post by **lumpymo** » 16 Jan 2005, 18:46

TACTICS?
Holding to that extent is a foul, and that referee screwed up in that fight, you can't honestly feel that SRL holding to that extent and not getting penalized was a sign of the ref. doing a fair job.
Holyfield keeping his head down is a tactic when you work the body, the idea is to get your head lower then your opponents, this way your less likely to get head butts while inside at close quarters. Tyson is a shorter guy and tends to lead in with his head, so the result was Tyson crying foul about someone beating him to the punch (no pun intended).
Tactics, no I don't think so, screw up by refs who were shy/hesitant to reprimand "celebrity" fighters for blatant and constant fouling thats what seemed to be the way it was with SRL fights. Watch the third Duran SRL fight, again the ref allowing him to foul with no caution or even a mention of it, that was the "norm" for alot of his fights.
I am not saying Duran wasn't shy to foul and get away with it as well in fights. I think one of his worst was when he thumbed Davey Moore in their fight. You talk about a ref. that was out to lunch, that ref after that night should have been banned from ever refereeing again, for life, not for the thumbing but for allowing that fight to continue on and on.

cheers M.O.