BoxRec

Idisagree wrote:

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote: Well, its pretty well established that Duran is the best Lightweight of all time, most boxing historians agree with that as do most boxing fans. Check The Ring, ESPN, or Bert Sugar lists. Many boxing historians have him ranked the highest, the only LW people consider better than Duran is Benny Leonard.

I rank Duran higher p4p, and I do also rank him higher than Sweet Pea at 135 p4p. However, head to head at 135 is another story. Pernell is the type of boxer that could in any given night outbox any fighter in history at that weight class. He was brilliant and he had the style to frustrate Duran. See Duran vs Benitez. Benitez never gave Duran a chance to sit on his punches and was able to keep Duran off balance and kept his offense on check with his defensive skills. Sweet Pea could have done the same.

Also, I'm going for what I've seen of both, not by historians opinions. The rankings you are talking about are in p4p sense, not head to head.

True, but Benitez was 4 inches Taller than Pernell and had a longer reach so he was able to stay out of range and score effectively on Duran who wasn't in good shape anyway. I just don't see Whitaker beating a lightweight Roberto Duran.

Also, if historians are ranking the greatest "lightweights", it is not P4P, it only pertains to those in that division.

You can't really compare a Jr. Middleweight Duran in '82 with a prime Lightweight Duran circa the mid to late 70's, though. Duran simply wasn't as good a Jr. Middle as Benitez, which is why he lost that fight. Benitez didn't even use much lateral movement, he was able to stay content in his role as a counter-puncher, baiting Duran in from the ropes because Duran no longer had the sharpness, strength, legs, etc. to move in on Benitez and impose his game.

At Lightweight you can rest assured he did, and that Whitaker would know better than to attempt this sort of strategy off the ropes. Whitaker would have to be on the form he was against Nelson or, in theory even Ramirez I, to possibly get the verdict in this one. Consistently boxing off the backfoot behind the jab, leaving no room for error in close proximity. Is it possible? Sure. Probable? I don't know, which is why this matchup will always be one of the great hypotheticals.

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote:

Idisagree wrote:

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote: I don't know how hurt he was but he was dropped nonetheless. He didn't have his legs back completely until a little way through the next round. The only point I was trying to make is that he got dropped by Roger Mayweather who was far from a phenomenal fighter and that was when Sweet Pea was in his prime.

1. Are you kidding? Sweet Pea prime with only 11 professional fights??? That statement only proves that you haven't seen much of the prime Whitaker.
2. Roger was lucky that the bell save him in the first round.
3. Pernell had Mayweather hurt several times throughout the fight.
4. Pernell was hurt but he was nowhere close to being in danger of getting stopped.
5. This fight should be based on skills prime for prime not prime vs green.

Well, its pretty well established that Duran is the best Lightweight of all time, most boxing historians agree with that as do most boxing fans. Check The Ring, ESPN, or Bert Sugar lists. Many boxing historians have him ranked the highest, the only LW people consider better than Duran is Benny Leonard.

It's, "pretty-well established," that your average fan &, "historian," is 100-fold more familiar with Duran than they are Williams, Gans, Leonard, etc...that's where consensus of ignorance bleeds from.

He was not as good a LW as Whitaker.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote:

Idisagree wrote: 1. Are you kidding? Sweet Pea prime with only 11 professional fights??? That statement only proves that you haven't seen much of the prime Whitaker.
2. Roger was lucky that the bell save him in the first round.
3. Pernell had Mayweather hurt several times throughout the fight.
4. Pernell was hurt but he was nowhere close to being in danger of getting stopped.
5. This fight should be based on skills prime for prime not prime vs green.

Well, its pretty well established that Duran is the best Lightweight of all time, most boxing historians agree with that as do most boxing fans. Check The Ring, ESPN, or Bert Sugar lists. Many boxing historians have him ranked the highest, the only LW people consider better than Duran is Benny Leonard.

It's, "pretty-well established," that your average fan &, "historian," is 100-fold more familiar with Duran than they are Williams, Gans, Leonard, etc...that's where consensus of ignorance bleeds from.

He was not as good a LW as Whitaker.

Really?

Duran's decade of dominance in the Lightweight division says otherwise.

Did I say he was not as good a Champion as Whitaker at LW? No, I did not. I said he was an inferior fighter.

& he was. & to say as much is to mortally offend Duran's legion of irrational followers.

I pick Duran. At 135 he was a maniac with endless energy who would hunt you down. He hit harder and no way Whitaker would be able to ko him. Duran was also pretty fast in his own right at 135.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Did I say he was not as good a Champion as Whitaker at LW? No, I did not. I said he was an inferior fighter.

& he was. & to say as much is to mortally offend Duran's legion of irrational followers.

If Pernell were a better LW than Duran, then he would have more victories at this weight.

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Did I say he was not as good a Champion as Whitaker at LW? No, I did not. I said he was an inferior fighter.

& he was. & to say as much is to mortally offend Duran's legion of irrational followers.

If Pernell were a better LW than Duran, then he would have more victories at this weight.

Number of victories has nothing to do with it. Whitaker moved up before he could obtain as many as Duran because there was more money waiting for him at 140 and 147 with less strain involved in making weight.

Diamond WEAPON wrote:

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Did I say he was not as good a Champion as Whitaker at LW? No, I did not. I said he was an inferior fighter.

& he was. & to say as much is to mortally offend Duran's legion of irrational followers.

If Pernell were a better LW than Duran, then he would have more victories at this weight.

Number of victories has nothing to do with it. Whitaker moved up before he could obtain as many as Duran because there was more money waiting for him at 140 and 147 with less strain involved in making weight.

This is true, but I just don't believe Whitaker had the tools to beat Duran. Duran has beaten many "boxers", Whitaker has never faced anyone remotely close to Duran's relentless aggression.

Whitaker makes him say "No mas".

Diamond WEAPON wrote:

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Did I say he was not as good a Champion as Whitaker at LW? No, I did not. I said he was an inferior fighter.

& he was. & to say as much is to mortally offend Duran's legion of irrational followers.

If Pernell were a better LW than Duran, then he would have more victories at this weight.

Number of victories has nothing to do with it. Whitaker moved up before he could obtain as many as Duran because there was more money waiting for him at 140 and 147 with less strain involved in making weight.

No kidding --- & take heed, Sugar-man. WEAPON is probably the least likely guy on this forum to say anything which could possibly be construed as in defence of Whitaker. No matter who you pick to win, that is the dumbest logic I've heard in a while. Whitaker isn't as good as Duran because he doesn't have the same number of victories? Jesus, that's astoundingly stupid.

I guess Frans Botha was a better Heavyweight than Gene Tunney.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:I guess Frans Botha was a better Heavyweight than Gene Tunney.

You bastard! I was about to make a Joe Mesi/Joe Frazier joke.

We can still laugh at the statement together

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Diamond WEAPON wrote:

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote: If Pernell were a better LW than Duran, then he would have more victories at this weight.

Number of victories has nothing to do with it. Whitaker moved up before he could obtain as many as Duran because there was more money waiting for him at 140 and 147 with less strain involved in making weight.

No kidding --- & take heed, Sugar-man. WEAPON is probably the least likely guy on this forum to say anything which could possibly be construed as in defence of Whitaker. No matter who you pick to win, that is the dumbest logic I've heard in a while. Whitaker isn't as good as Duran because he doesn't have the same number of victories? Jesus, that's astoundingly stupid.

I guess Frans Botha was a better Heavyweight than Gene Tunney.

That is completely irrelevant to Duran/ Whitkaer, Botha isn't even in the same league as Tunney so that is a terrible analogy.

Duran and Whitaker are both elite fighters, Botha isn't.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Diamond WEAPON wrote:

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote: If Pernell were a better LW than Duran, then he would have more victories at this weight.

Number of victories has nothing to do with it. Whitaker moved up before he could obtain as many as Duran because there was more money waiting for him at 140 and 147 with less strain involved in making weight.

No kidding --- & take heed, Sugar-man. WEAPON is probably the least likely guy on this forum to say anything which could possibly be construed as in defence of Whitaker. No matter who you pick to win, that is the dumbest logic I've heard in a while. Whitaker isn't as good as Duran because he doesn't have the same number of victories? Jesus, that's astoundingly stupid.

I guess Frans Botha was a better Heavyweight than Gene Tunney.

Based on your theory that the number of victories are somewhat irrelevant, I guess I could make a case for Edwin Viruet being better than Benny Leonard.

Anyway, this is getting dull.

They were both fantastic fighters and either could have won on any given night.

I can see scenarios were Duran wins, and I can see Whitaker outboxing and frustrating Duran to a decision.

Whittaker would be hit more in this fight that the rest of his lightweight career put together. He’d make the rounds close and hard to score but his edge in reflexes would be minimal in this fight. And he’d be facing possibly an even more accurate puncher.

Duran would win a close but clear points decision.

I would say Duran, but I would expect it to go the distance and be competitive. Whitaker is a better boxer than Buchanan or DeJesus or Bizzarro or Viruet and they all went deep with Duran; Duran by MD/UD... two of the three best lightweight champions, but Duran at Lightweight and at his best was as complete a fighter as you could name.