Whitaker or Floyd?

Best boxer ever?

 

The Pea that beat McGirt in 93…:beats Floyd imo

 

Neither is the GOAT, for one.

Whitaker was better, IMO. Not by a big margin, but by a clear margin.

Floyd at no point was as good as Whitaker was from 89-93.

That's the thing about Floyd - so much of his greatness is based around his tremendous longevity and consistency - which counts for a lot.

But purely on peak, I feel and will ALWAYS feel that Floyd is a cut below Whitaker and Roy. Over their respective primes, they were just more dominant and spectacular than Floyd.

For what it's worth, most of us on here remember Floyd's peak, and during that peak he was NEVER EVER considered on the level of Whitaker or Jones.

It wasn't until Floyd stayed so good for so long that all this "TBE" shit started, fueled by casuals.

 

I’d peak Whitaker from 135-147 (up to about 94’ or 95’) to beat Floyd at these weights in a close match.

I think Whitaker’s jab and workrate would make the difference m.

 

Whitaker.

 

Whitaker for me. Just a perfect blend of offense and defense when at his best. Can't see Floyd outfighting Chavez up close.

 

He couldn't even outfight the homeless man's Chavez up close.

 

Floyd was more technically skilled, more technically correct, and overall probably more talented offensively; but Whitaker was better. Even if he wasn't quite as skilled, he was still one of the most skilled fighters ever; and skill isn't as important as being effective in practice. Whitaker was harder to actually beat IMO. He'd beat Floyd. I suppose an argument for Floyd would be that he was more intelligent.

For me, they could both claim top five slots in boxing history in terms of how good they were.

 

Leonard, Duran, Jones, Hagler, Floyd, Whitaker, Spinks, and Monzon are the 8 best fighters of the last 50 years IMO.

How the top 5 would rank is subjective.

I realize that Pac is among the 5 GREATEST fighters of the last 50 years, but I think all the above guys were better than him... IMO.

 

I also think that Whitaker was far more of a natural than Floyd.

Floyd had to work VERY VERY hard at perfecting the things that Pea could do in his sleep.

 

I would rank Pacquiao as better than Monzon.

 

I agree with you btw that Floyd was more intelligent. He had to be. Pea just saw and reacted to things naturally.

 

I would disagree, but that'd be going way off topic of Floyd v Pea.

 

I think Whitaker was smarter, honestly. He could OUTFIGHT brawlers on the inside and he didn’t always need all that holding or one punch grab strategy.

Floyd was just flashier and a bit quicker. But Whitaker was more adaptable all around.

 

I dunno, Whitaker obviously had a great ring IQ, but Mayweather is one of the smartest fighters I've ever seen in a boxing ring. Either way, if there is a difference it's minimal enough to be negligible.

 

I completely disagree.

Whitaker by far the flashier of the two. I don't think that's even really up for debate. You never saw Mayweather clowing around with his hands down like Whitaker did vs De La Hoya, or against Tito, or even Ramirez. Nor does Mayweather grab the other guy's ass or pull his pants down. The vast majority of the time, Mayweather was strictly business. Whitaker did shit coz it was awesome.

And I don't think Whitaker was better at making adjustments. There aren't any instances of him changing his tactics on the fly because he was losing, he either got it right heading in or changed it next time. Mayweather would never struggle working with guys like Hurtado and Rivero, and there's no instances of Whitaker showing an ability to adapt like Mayweather did in the second round vs Mosley. Not even close IMO.

I would agree Whitaker was more complete though, as he was a better infighter and much more comfortable being aggressive, while also being brilliant on the back foot.

I'd also argue Mayweather's intangibles are a little more trustable than Whitaker's, but I wouldn't argue heavily because intangibles get really hard to define - I suppose the word gives that away.

 

I think that just comes down to Pea's ability.

The best comparison I can make - and that i know you'll get because you're a hoops fan - is a Kobe vs Jordan comparison.

Kobe had to work very hard at things that Mike just did naturally, cause Mike was a lot more gifted.

 

Floyd is a student of the game. He puts on a front like he's too good to watch boxing, but its BS. I think he meticulously studied every opponent, and already knew their tendencies.

Pea, from what I heard, never watched film. He just got in there and naturally analyzed and reacted.

 

It's Rare That REED Does This, but He Has to Give DOUBLE L Credit for a Floyd Point He Made YEARS Ago...

As He Moved Up, Floyd RARELY Faced Guys TALLER Than Him....He Faced SOME, Obviously (Corrales, N'Dou, DeLa) But it Wasn't the Norm...w/That Said, How Many Times was Pernell Whittaker the TALLER Fighter???...

More Times Than Not, Sweet Pea was the SHORTER/SMALLER Man, Yet He Still Dominated...

Sweet Pea > Floyd





REED

 

This argument would be more appropriate if Mayweather's best performance wasn't against somebody significantly taller.

 

REED Will Safely ASSume You're Referencing Corrales, But in Fairness, He Said Floyd Rarely Fought Taller Guys "As He Moved Up"...

The Likelihood of Fighting in 5 Different Weight Classes and Having a Height ADVANTAGE More Times Than Not Makes Sense if You're Tommy Hearns...Not Soooooo Much w/Floyd Mayweather...





REED

 

Floyd became very selective as he moved up in weight.

 

While I'm highly critical of Floyd's cherry picking, I would favor him vs Whitaker in a close fight. Wouldn't bet my house on it though

 

Floyd is naturally bigger than Whitaker. Floyd relied on the same thing though. Floyd mostly fought guys that come forward and were not really boxers first. He struggled when he went up against guys who prioritized boxing over brawling. I think sweet pea would’ve won but it’s fun to think about

 

I really would have like to see pbf against forrest after the later ttoued with Baldomir

 

Even if this were true, I don't see how it is relevant. Imo the result is the only thing that counts, whether you achieve it with talent or hard work is meaningless. Especially considering that the ability to work hard snd learn are types of talent as well

 

Whitaker for me, however neither are the best fighters ever.

Pea could entertain with his defense, while Floyd could put you to sleep with is. That is not the basis of why I would pick Pea over Floyd though.

 

how bout the chin on Whitaker though

 

It's amazing, I don't know where the myth it was bad has come from.