BoxRec

???

When it comes to skills his defensive skills are better, but offensively I don't think so.

I rate Whittaker higher up the LW rankings than I rank Jones at MW or LHW. The SMW division hasn't been around long enough for a fair comparison.

Both were very skilled fighters.

Yes, he was way much better than Jones and fought far way better competition. In the 90s, Whitaker was so dominant that I used to go to sleep watching his bouts because they were one sided.

elmersalsa wrote:Yes, he was way much better than Jones and fought far way better competition. In the 90s, Whitaker was so dominant that I used to go to sleep watching his bouts because they were one sided.

Pernell was, in my mind, definitively better than Jones overall. That said, I'd still prefer to watch Jones live to Whitaker.

Close, but Jones is better overall! Whitaker's main trait was defense and defense alone does not win bouts...especially big bouts. As far as defense Whitaker is among the top ten, possibly even top five, of all time, but in his prime Jones took fewer punches than any fighter that was boxing and that went on until he got older. Jones had a great defense and rarely took any clean shots while in his prime, but Jones' offense is what puts him above Whitaker.

I rate Whittaker higher p4p than Jones Jr.

Jones Jr was more exciting to watch, but as a p4per, he doesn't rate as high IMO.

There are too many of his compatriots that he did not fight, unlike Whittaker.

How can you argue with untouchable - that's Whitaker!

Yes, Pernell Whitaker is superior to Roy Jones Jr.

I think what lets the legacy of Roy Jones down was his chin.. It's the same with Tommy Hearns.
I would edge towards Whitaker.

P4P I think Whitaker just edges Jones. Pernell was just too good against a wide variety of opponents. Jones beat a lot of good fighters and made them look like outright bums and average joes and his weight-jumping is legendary stuff but his eventual defeats to Tarver and Johnson harm his legacy along with the fact that he missed out on a few fights during his prime that would've bolstered his legacy with wins. Rematches with Toney and Hopkins (earlier than it happened) would've helped too.

Yes he is.

Pernell did prove himself against the elite and was an absolute defensive wizard. Yes he is/was better boxer than Jones.

happynormal wrote:How can you argue with untouchable - that's Whitaker!

The untouchable was Nicolino Locche

Jones was not the invincible fighter that some make out to be. On the other hand he didn't have a glass jaw like some people seem to think. Remember, the ko loss against Tarver was when he was 35. Up until then there was no reason to think he had a weak chin.
Whitaker was actually knocked down more than Jones up until that point.

Whitaker was the better defensive fighter, but Jones was pretty hard to hit. Jones was certainly a better offensive fighter.

However, with Jones, the bottom line is that he did not push himself to prove it his greatness. His win over Hopkins was before Hopkins had reached his prime and he would not fight him again. He also did not fight Darius M. at 175. Jones was the better talent, but Whitaker should be rated higher because of his superior record against top opponents.

Prime for prime you're splitting hairs between effectiveness. Whitaker was better technically, Jones Jr. more physically outstanding. The difference between the two lied in their willingness to test their skills against all comers, and in that respect Whitaker clearly shone brighter. Leave the uneducated to regurgitate the same old tosh about his supposedly sub-par offensive skills (truly laughable stuff) and hot-dogging style. The man had the heart of a champion through and through. Anyone who's seen more than the random highlight on Youtube knows that.

For me. In terms of footwork and handspeed Whitaker is above Jones, but Jones had more power and was the better finisher of the two as Whittaker only scored 17 out of his 40 wins by knockout while Jones is 40 out of 54, but Whittaker was better defensive as you really could not catch him flush.