BoxRec

Pernell Whitaker captured Olympic Gold at the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics. One of only a handful fighters in history to win titles in four different weight classes, Sweat Pea compiled a professional record of 40-4-1, 17 KO's.

Whitaker was inducted into the Boxing Hall of Fame in Canastota, NY in 2007.

Here's a look at Sweet Pea's statistical achievements:

• Pernell "Sweet Pea" Whitaker is one of only seven fighters in CompuBox's 26-year history to landed 500 or more punches in a fight.

• Whitaker and 1984 Olympic teammate Meldrick Taylor landed 400-plus punches in a title fight three time each.

• Whitaker LANDED 286 jabs (an average of 24 per round) in his decision win over fellow Hall of Famer Azumah Nelson (5/19/90). The lightweight avg. is 4 landed per round.

• Whitaker's 286 jabs landed vs. Nelson is second all time in CompuBox history. Whitaker also landed 272 jabs in his W 12 over Santos Cardona, the 5th most in CompuBox history. (Ike Quartey holds the record with 313 landed jabs in his draw vs. Jose Luis Lopez (10/10/97)

• Whitaker outlanded Julio Cesar Chavez 311-220 in total punches in their controversial draw on 9/10/93. Whitaker landed 46% of his power punches vs. Chavez. Whitaker landed 50 punches in round 8 vs. Chavez, the 2nd most by a JCC opponent. #1 is the 53 that fellow Olympian Meldrick Taylor landed vs. Chavez in round 10 of their epic fight.

And someone on fb was telling me yesterday he couldn't beat Floyd or Manny because he wasn't active enough. Lol

I know we're talking about Pernell here, but one thing popped out for me on that list. Troy Dorsey landed 620 punches on Paez and still lost?

gilgamesh wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 13:48 I know we're talking about Pernell here, but one thing popped out for me on that list. Troy Dorsey landed 620 punches on Paez and still lost?

Wonder how much Paez landed..

The only other loss there is Jo Agbeko. Strange that.

One thing than can be said.. no one throws their jab anymore. Arguably the best punch you can throw is a jab.. and most now days don’t use it.

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 15:24

gilgamesh wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 13:48 I know we're talking about Pernell here, but one thing popped out for me on that list. Troy Dorsey landed 620 punches on Paez and still lost?

Wonder how much Paez landed..

The only other loss there is Jo Agbeko. Strange that.

One thing than can be said.. no one throws their jab anymore. Arguably the best punch you can throw is a jab.. and most now days don’t use it.

Cotto had a real good, steady jab, and it kept him competitive with most anybody, and considering most see him as a bit of an overachiever I'd say that points to the importance of the jab.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 15:26

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 15:24

Wonder how much Paez landed..

The only other loss there is Jo Agbeko. Strange that.

One thing than can be said.. no one throws their jab anymore. Arguably the best punch you can throw is a jab.. and most now days don’t use it.

Cotto had a real good, steady jab, and it kept him competitive with most anybody, and considering most see him as a bit of an overachiever I'd say that points to the importance of the jab.

Cotto? Overachieved?

gilgamesh wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 13:48 I know we're talking about Pernell here, but one thing popped out for me on that list. Troy Dorsey landed 620 punches on Paez and still lost?

Dorsey got robbed against paez and Kelley.

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 15:57

gilgamesh wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 15:26

Cotto had a real good, steady jab, and it kept him competitive with most anybody, and considering most see him as a bit of an overachiever I'd say that points to the importance of the jab.

Cotto? Overachieved?

Yeah, never heard that before.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 16:05

gilgamesh wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 13:48 I know we're talking about Pernell here, but one thing popped out for me on that list. Troy Dorsey landed 620 punches on Paez and still lost?

Dorsey got robbed against paez and Kelley.

It certainly sounds like it.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 16:06

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 15:57

Cotto? Overachieved?

Yeah, never heard that before.

I don't know I mean he always seemed like a guy who wasn't exactly spectacular in any one area, just a good, steady boxer. And he had a real good jab. I think it helped him pull out some close ones.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 08:22 And someone on fb was telling me yesterday he couldn't beat Floyd or Manny because he wasn't active enough. Lol

To be fair, and as much as I’m an admirer of Pernell Whitaker, BoxRec stats alone aren’t an adequate barometer to gauge whether a certain fighter is potentially capable of beating a specific opponent.

It’s extremely naive to believe otherwise.

If anyone is deeply offended by the notion that I’ve proposed, then all I can do is apologise for saying something factually-correct that upsets them.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 17:07

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 16:06

Yeah, never heard that before.

I don't know I mean he always seemed like a guy who wasn't exactly spectacular in any one area, just a good, steady boxer. And he had a real good jab. I think it helped him pull out some close ones.

He was a mega prospect that did what was predicted of him. I've heard a few that think he underachieved, never heard over before. Either way, great fighter that had a couple possibly unfortunate circumstances with margs hands and Manny's juice. I remember being ridiculed on here for saying he'd smash Martinez but nobody gives him credit now.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 17:25

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 08:22 And someone on fb was telling me yesterday he couldn't beat Floyd or Manny because he wasn't active enough. Lol

To be fair, and as much as I’m an admirer of Pernell Whitaker, BoxRec stats alone aren’t an adequate barometer to gauge whether a certain fighter is potentially capable of beating a specific opponent.

It’s extremely naive to believe otherwise.

If anyone is deeply offended by the notion that I’ve proposed, then all I can do is apologise for saying something factually-correct that upsets them.

Those stats indicate that activity wouldn't be a reason for defeat. I don't expect you to apologize every time you're wrong or misinterpret something. That would take up all your time, but I accept your apology all the same. Better luck next time kid, I have faith you'll pop that cherry trying to correct me someday.

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 06:59 • Whitaker outlanded Julio Cesar Chavez 311-220 in total punches in their controversial draw on 9/10/93.

Compubletch?

The fight was nowhere near as close as that alleged punch total.

ironbeard wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 17:46

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 06:59 • Whitaker outlanded Julio Cesar Chavez 311-220 in total punches in their controversial draw on 9/10/93.

Compubletch?

The fight was nowhere near as close as that alleged punch total.

Seems like a lot of punches to land on prime Whitaker. About 19 per round.

Especially since Chavez wasn't all that eager to engage once he began to sample Whitaker's body shots starting in the 3rd round.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 17:35

gilgamesh wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 17:07

I don't know I mean he always seemed like a guy who wasn't exactly spectacular in any one area, just a good, steady boxer. And he had a real good jab. I think it helped him pull out some close ones.

He was a mega prospect that did what was predicted of him. I've heard a few that think he underachieved, never heard over before. Either way, great fighter that had a couple possibly unfortunate circumstances with margs hands and Manny's juice. I remember being ridiculed on here for saying he'd smash Martinez but nobody gives him credit now.

Yeah. I was picking Cotto by the time the Martinez fight rolled around as well, but I'll admit that was largely because your argument had convinced me, and it turned out to be right. So kudos to you on that.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑17 Jul 2019, 13:12

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 17:35
He was a mega prospect that did what was predicted of him. I've heard a few that think he underachieved, never heard over before. Either way, great fighter that had a couple possibly unfortunate circumstances with margs hands and Manny's juice. I remember being ridiculed on here for saying he'd smash Martinez but nobody gives him credit now.

Yeah. I was picking Cotto by the time the Martinez fight rolled around as well, but I'll admit that was largely because your argument had convinced me, and it turned out to be right. So kudos to you on that.

None needed, the bookie money was more than enough. Still appreciate it.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 17:39

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 17:25
To be fair, and as much as I’m an admirer of Pernell Whitaker, BoxRec stats alone aren’t an adequate barometer to gauge whether a certain fighter is potentially capable of beating a specific opponent.

It’s extremely naive to believe otherwise.

If anyone is deeply offended by the notion that I’ve proposed, then all I can do is apologise for saying something factually-correct that upsets them.

Those stats indicate that activity wouldn't be a reason for defeat. I don't expect you to apologize every time you're wrong or misinterpret something. That would take up all your time, but I accept your apology all the same. Better luck next time kid, I have faith you'll pop that cherry trying to correct me someday.

CompuBox stats are intriguing but any knowledgeable and passionate die-hard fan of the sport of boxing will surely realise they’re utterly irrelevant in terms of scoring bouts or for prediction purposes.

I hope you sincerely believe otherwise and can provide a moderately intelligent counter argument?

I’d actually be sincerely impressed if you managed to do this.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑17 Jul 2019, 18:13

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑16 Jul 2019, 17:39

Those stats indicate that activity wouldn't be a reason for defeat. I don't expect you to apologize every time you're wrong or misinterpret something. That would take up all your time, but I accept your apology all the same. Better luck next time kid, I have faith you'll pop that cherry trying to correct me someday.

CompuBox stats are intriguing but any knowledgeable and passionate die-hard fan of the sport of boxing will surely realise they’re utterly irrelevant in terms of scoring bouts or for prediction purposes.

I hope you sincerely believe otherwise and can provide a moderately intelligent counter argument?

I’d actually be sincerely impressed if you managed to do this.

Hijacking another thread EO?

oogiebe wrote: ↑17 Jul 2019, 18:14Hijacking another thread EO?

It is perfectly reasonable to be a fan of Pernell Whitaker, whilst also not being a huge of CompuBox.

Have I said another thing that many would feel deeply emotional and outraged about?

Is CompuBox a 100% reliable barometer to determine “who beats whom”?

I have already lavished a huge amount of praise on Whitaker’s legacy. I’m not obliged to use someone’s death to justify the credibility of CompuBox.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑17 Jul 2019, 18:34

oogiebe wrote: ↑17 Jul 2019, 18:14Hijacking another thread EO?

It is perfectly reasonable to be a fan of Pernell Whitaker, whilst also not being a huge of CompuBox.

Have I said another thing that many would feel deeply emotional and outraged about?

Is CompuBox a 100% reliable barometer to determine “who beats whom”?

I have already lavished a huge amount of praise on Whitaker’s legacy. I’m not obliged to use someone’s death to justify the credibility of CompuBox.

So the answer is 'yes.'

oogiebe wrote: ↑17 Jul 2019, 18:37

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑17 Jul 2019, 18:34
It is perfectly reasonable to be a fan of Pernell Whitaker, whilst also not being a huge of CompuBox.

Have I said another thing that many would feel deeply emotional and outraged about?

Is CompuBox a 100% reliable barometer to determine “who beats whom”?

I have already lavished a huge amount of praise on Whitaker’s legacy. I’m not obliged to use someone’s death to justify the credibility of CompuBox.

So the answer is 'yes.'

It depends on the answer to the question.

I haven’t hijacked this thread. I just believe that celebrating Whitaker’s legacy and the justification for CompuBox are two completely different subject matters.

Obviously you clearly believe that both are one and the same.

oogiebe wrote: ↑17 Jul 2019, 18:14

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑17 Jul 2019, 18:13
CompuBox stats are intriguing but any knowledgeable and passionate die-hard fan of the sport of boxing will surely realise they’re utterly irrelevant in terms of scoring bouts or for prediction purposes.

I hope you sincerely believe otherwise and can provide a moderately intelligent counter argument?

I’d actually be sincerely impressed if you managed to do this.

Hijacking another thread EO?

He always tries. No need to explain anything to it. Just sends it off the rails. Should be pretty easy to figure out that Floyd beating Whitaker because of activity is hilarious.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑17 Jul 2019, 19:55

oogiebe wrote: ↑17 Jul 2019, 18:14

Hijacking another thread EO?

He always tries. No need to explain anything to it. Just sends it off the rails. Should be pretty easy to figure out that Floyd beating Whitaker because of activity is hilarious.

I would have Whitaker over FMJ. But I'm a bit biased. EO going "off the rails" on another thread that has me literally crying with laughter. Classic EO.

oogiebe wrote: ↑17 Jul 2019, 19:59

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑17 Jul 2019, 19:55
He always tries. No need to explain anything to it. Just sends it off the rails. Should be pretty easy to figure out that Floyd beating Whitaker because of activity is hilarious.

I would have Whitaker over FMJ. But I'm a bit biased. EO going "off the rails" on another thread that has me literally crying with laughter. Classic EO.

Once again, you attack me for responding to something that you asked and then you refrain from addressing what I wrote.

Instead you falsely claim that I’ve gone “off the rails”, when all I did was precisely answer the question you posed.

Am I wrong? Then prove otherwise!